1. As to the Plaintiff, Defendant Puld Construction Co., Ltd.: KRW 2,937,00 for Defendant Puld Construction Co., Ltd.; KRW 7,200,00 for Defendant B and each of the said money.

1. Determination as to the claim against the defendant company

A. On December 14, 201, the Plaintiff asserted the construction cost claim: (a) the Defendant Company subcontracted the work cost of KRW 123,00,000,00 for the construction cost of the office building building outer walls, glass, and the Complex Panel Corporation (hereinafter “instant construction”) among D remodeling projects located in Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Changwon-si; and (b) the additional construction cost of KRW 194,09,00,000 for eight times thereafter; (c) however, the Plaintiff was paid KRW 294,50,000 out of the said payment and did not receive the remainder of KRW 2,259,00,000. As such, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay the said unpaid construction cost to the Plaintiff.

D. The Plaintiff: (a) subcontracted the instant construction work from the Defendant Company with the price of KRW 123 million; (b) thereafter, the additional construction was carried out several times; and (c) the fact that the Defendant Company received KRW 294.5 million from the Defendant Company as the price for the construction work does not conflict; or (d) the fact that the Defendant Company received from the Defendant Company the said amount of KRW 3,44.5 million is recognized by the purport of the entire

Furthermore, it is not sufficient to recognize the additional construction cost solely on the basis of the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it as to whether the additional construction cost has been due to the amount claimed by the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

B. The fact that the Plaintiff paid KRW 2,937,00 on March 8, 2012 in lieu of the Defendant Company upon Defendant B’s request that the Defendant Company pay the instant wastewater treatment plant expenses related to the instant construction work. Thus, there is no dispute regarding the fact that the Plaintiff paid the Defendant Company’s debt on behalf of the Defendant Company without any obligation, which constitutes the performance of the Defendant Company’s business management, and thus, the Defendant Company is obligated to reimburse the expenses incurred by

Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant Company is from September 18, 2014, which served on the Plaintiff a copy of the instant complaint seeking payment of KRW 2,937,00 and the following day after the instant complaint was served on the Defendant Company.