1. The defendant limited liability company A shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 175,571,80 as well as to the Plaintiff from July 16, 2015 to September 19, 2017.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 21, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a joint supply and demand agreement and a contract agreement (i.e., the instant construction project) with C New Construction Project ordered by the former Local Government Procurement Service (hereinafter “instant construction project”).

Defendant Limited Company A (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant Company”) to participate in the tendering procedure.

) The joint supply and demand agreement (hereinafter “instant joint supply and demand agreement”) shall be concluded with the non-party Man-Jon Co., Ltd. and the non-party D Co., Ltd.

(2) As a representative company, the Plaintiff submitted a joint supply and demand agreement in which the Plaintiff’s share 60%, the Defendant Company’s share 13% as a joint business entity, the Man-ro Co., Ltd.’s ownership ratio 15%, and Nonparty D Co., Ltd.’s share 12% as the share ratio. (2) The said joint supply and demand agreement was awarded the instant construction contract by investing the Plaintiff’s total construction cost as the representative company around March 13, 2012 at KRW 7,820,113,100, and was awarded the instant construction contract.

The former Local Government Procurement Service entered into a contract for construction works on February 22, 2015 as of the date of the commencement of the construction contract between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, the representative of the said joint contractor, and on December 22, 2015, the date of the commencement of the construction works, and the details of the contract have been changed later on March 5, 2015, and the contract period was finally changed from April 9, 2012 to February 22, 2015.

B. 1) The instant construction project was executed and completed in March 2015, while the Plaintiff’s overall progress and around March 2015. While the instant construction project is being carried out, the Plaintiff applied for construction cost on behalf of the said company, and the said company again transferred 75% of the construction cost to the Plaintiff when the said company pays the construction cost by equity interest in the said company.

The defendant company also transferred 75% to the plaintiff 85% of the construction price paid by the ordering office as follows, and the plaintiff transferred to the plaintiff 16% of each amount.