1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 147,00,000 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and its payment from April 30, 2014 to December 18, 2014.

1. On March 12, 2012, the Plaintiff received a contract from the Defendants for the New Construction Corporation C (the construction period from March 20, 2012 to November 30, 2012; the construction cost of KRW 1,750,000,000, value-added tax separately).

On October 2012, the Plaintiff discontinued construction work on the ground that the payment of the construction cost is unpaid.

On November 2, 2012, the Plaintiff would cancel the construction contract without paying KRW 100,000,000 to the Defendants by November 9, 2012.

'' notified'.

The Defendants responded that they do not have any obligation to pay the cost of the work.

After the progress of the construction project, the Defendants notified the Plaintiff of the termination of the construction contract on February 22, 2013.

Meanwhile, on the other hand, on February 6, 2014, the Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor was issued a final and conclusive judgment against the Plaintiff (Seoul District Court Decision 2013Da29802 Decided July 2, 2013), and was subject to attachment and attachment order as to the part of KRW 31,675,332 ( KRW 16,675,332 against Defendant A, and KRW 15,000 against Defendant B) out of the Plaintiff’s claim for construction price against the Defendants.

[Grounds for recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap's 1-3, Gap's 1-2, Eul's 1-8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the principal lawsuit and the claims of the Plaintiff’s successor

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice at an agreed amount after entering into an agreement on the settlement of accounts with the Defendants according to the flag altitude.

The Defendants are obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000 which was not paid out of the amount of KRW 950,000 agreed upon to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendants agreed to pay KRW 800,000,000 out of the construction cost of KRW 1,750,000,000 to the amount loaned by the bank.

It seems that the bank's request for confirmation and payment of loans is prepared and submitted to the bank to obtain loans from the bank.

(B) 1, 2, A, the purport of the entire pleadings. Therefore, the testimony of D, the only party to the Plaintiff, by itself, was confirmed by the Defendants, and signed on the request for payment of the loan, after confirming the actual authenticity of the testimony.

or the plaintiff.