1. The Defendant calculated the Plaintiff’s KRW 32,300,000 as well as the annual interest rate of KRW 15% from September 27, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, upon receiving the work order from Nonparty C (the husband of the Defendant representative D) and owned by Nonparty E (C) from September 29, 2016 to December 27, 2016, performed construction works of the construction-based sludge and concrete structures adjacent to retaining walls, among the construction works of the new neighborhood living facilities on the Franchi City’s land owned by Nonparty E (C).

B. The Plaintiff received KRW 2,00,000,000 from the Defendant on November 20, 2016, and KRW 1,500,000 on January 16, 2017.

C. On January 2018, Nonparty G, upon delegation by the Defendant, drafted a written confirmation with the following content to the Plaintiff:

The unpaid amount: 37.8 million won: 5.5 million won (B: 3.5 million won, E. 2.0 million won): The unpaid amount shall be paid by 10,000,000 won out of the unpaid amount, until January 31, 2018, in relation to the above facts of KRW 32.3 million. It is necessary to reach an agreement by future compromise. It is necessary to raise an objection against the decision on the construction cost of 2017da1042.

D. On April 11, 2018, G: (a) issued a cashier’s check of KRW 1,500,000 at the face value with the Defendant’s delegation at the delivery site to the Plaintiff for consultation on the preparation of a notarial deed on the payment of the construction cost, withdrawal of the instant suit, etc.; and (b) drafted a certificate of confirmation (c) of the following details.

Of the amount of 37,800,000 won, 1,500,000 won shall be paid regularly, and the balance other than that shall be paid by May 25, 2018. The District Court 2017da1042 recognizes the claim for the construction price.

E. As the Defendant did not reach an agreement on the preparation of authentic deeds, withdrawal of lawsuits, etc., the Defendant reported the loss of cashier’s checks, and revoked the report of loss after crossinging them.

【Evidence A’s Evidence Nos. 1 through 11, 3, 4

2. Assertion and determination

A. In the instant case where the Plaintiff claims for the payment of the unpaid construction cost against the Defendant as the cause of the claim, the Defendant did not have a subcontract relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and even if not, G’s confirmation (Evidence A7) is delegated by the Defendant, namely, KRW 10,00,00.