1. The Defendant’s KRW 34,00,000 as well as 6% per annum from July 28, 2012 to May 23, 2013 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendant was awarded a contract for construction of a newly constructed urban-type housing of 259 square meters on land owned by A and B (hereinafter “A housing”) and a newly built urban-type housing of 226 square meters on land owned by B (hereinafter “B housing”).

B. On March 13, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a subcontract with the head of the Defendant’s site E on the instant new housing construction works as follows.

Period: Contract amount from March 13, 2012 to April 15, 2012: A house 21,000,000, B house 43,000,000 won (excluding each value-added tax)

C. The Plaintiff completed each subcontracted project.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 3 through 6 evidence, Eul 1 and 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings of witness F's testimony

2. The director of the construction company at the site of the construction company who generally takes charge of the work related to the construction work at a specific construction site. Thus, barring any special circumstance, it is reasonable to deem that an employee delegated to a specific type of business or specified matters under Article 15 of the Commercial Act has a partial comprehensive power to execute the work. The scope of the work is all acts related to entering into a subcontract agreement and the payment of the construction cost, and making a mid-term lease contract related to the construction work, and payment of the rent, etc.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 94Da20884, Sept. 30, 1994). Each of the subcontracted projects in this case is a construction related to the execution of each of the above urban-type new housing construction projects, and the conclusion of such subcontract is within the scope of work E, a site manager, and thus, each of the above subcontracts is effective against the defendant.

Therefore, the defendant delivered to the defendant a copy of the complaint in this case from July 28, 2012 to the defendant, as claimed by the plaintiff, as the construction cost of KRW 34,00,000 and after completion of the construction work.