The defendant's KRW 34,958,000 for the plaintiff and its 6% per annum from April 26, 2019 to September 10, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D Co., Ltd.”) refers to “the instant construction work” from the Korea Rural Community Corporation (hereinafter “D Co., Ltd.”) to “the production, installation, and trial operation of Epics and Belgium Co., Ltd.” (hereinafter “D Co., Ltd.”) in the city of Jeonbuk-Eup (hereinafter “D Co., Ltd.”).

(B) Around August 13, 2018, the Plaintiff awarded a contract for construction cost of KRW 464,258,600, and then again awarded a contract for construction cost of KRW 250 million to the Plaintiff separately from value-added tax (value-added tax). On August 13, 2018, the Plaintiff, upon receipt of the contract for the instant construction work, awarded a contract for the instant construction work with the Defendant, shall be deemed to be the instant subcontract for construction work, under which the Plaintiff paid KRW 210,000,000 (value-added tax, separate payment terms: value-added tax, additional payment terms: KRW 10,00,000,000 as advance payment; KRW 20,000,000 after completion of production, installation, and operation; and the date of delivery, to which the Defendant subcontract for construction work is paid to the Defendant

AB concluded the agreement.

However, the content of the instant construction that the non-party company received from the non-party corporation, prepared a design drawing necessary for the production of the advanced test and obtained approval from the non-party corporation, and the content of the instant construction that the plaintiff received from the non-party company, also prepared a design drawing necessary for the production of the advanced test and obtained approval from the non-party company.

However, there is a dispute between the original and the Defendant as to whether the Defendant, according to the instant subcontract, included the work of preparing design drawings necessary for the production of the advanced design within the scope of the subcontracted construction, and whether the Defendant was the Plaintiff or the Defendant was the Plaintiff.

C. The Defendant commenced the production of the Belgium and Belgium pursuant to the instant subcontract, but delayed the completion of the instant construction due to the Defendant’s financial situation, the payment of the progress payment, the Defendant’s dispute, and the additional construction agreed between the Defendant and the Nonparty Company.

was in progress.