1. The Defendant’s KRW 24,911,645 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate from June 27, 2015 to May 31, 2016.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 31, 2013, the Plaintiff concluded a subcontract with regard to the civil engineering and household installation works (hereinafter “instant church works”) among the new construction works of the Seongbuk-gu, Seongbuk-gu, Sungwon-si, Sungwon-si, Sungwon-si, 9-1 (hereinafter “instant church works”), setting the construction period of KRW 748,00,000, and the period of construction from August 11, 2013 to November 26, 2013, to accept such subcontract.

B. On May 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with respect to the civil engineering works (hereinafter “instant hospital works”) among the new construction works of the rehabilitation hospital A located in Busan Northern-gu, Busan-gu, with the payment of KRW 330,00,000,00, and the construction period from May 30, 2014 to January 18, 2015, but entered into a subcontract to accept such subcontract, but the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with the payment of the construction cost of KRW 311,30,000 on January 18, 2015, and the construction period of KRW 311,30,000 on March 17, 2015. As to the additional civil engineering works on the same day, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with the payment of KRW 55,00,000,000.

C. The Plaintiff completed the instant church construction, hospital construction, and additional construction. Of the price for the instant church construction, the unpaid amount is KRW 37,400,000, and the unpaid amount is KRW 6,871,645, out of the price for the instant hospital construction and additional construction.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction cost of 44,271,645 won (=37,400,00 won 6,871,645 won) and damages for delay due to the instant church construction, hospital construction, and additional construction, unless there are other special circumstances to the Plaintiff.

3. Judgment on the defendant's assertion

A. The Defendant related to the instant hospital construction and additional construction asserts that the Plaintiff cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim before the completion of the settlement of construction cost, since the place of ordering the instant hospital construction and the settlement of construction cost was not completed.

However, the ground for the above argument by the defendant is to prevent the plaintiff from claiming the payment of the construction cost of this case.