1. The defendant shall pay 149,250,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from April 5, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 21, 2012, the Defendant entered into a construction contract with IMEL Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “MMEL Construction”) under which the Defendant would undertake construction of a newly built multi-household housing (hereinafter “multi-household housing”) on the ground B in Chungcheongnam-nam Budget-gun (hereinafter “instant multi-household housing”). The IMEL Construction subcontracted the part of the interior construction of the instant multi-household housing to D with the name of C.

B. After that, the Defendant, as of April 1, 2013, did not properly perform the construction due to the lack of on-site management, cancelled the contract with IMEL Construction as of April 1, 2013, and directly entrusted the interior construction of new buildings to D. On June 2012, E, the Plaintiff’s birth, entered into a construction contract for the instant multi-household housing supply and installation work with D, and began the construction from June 2012.

C. Meanwhile, as to the instant multi-household 108 10,9250,000, which is part of the construction price to be paid to D, the Defendant paid to D the instant multi-household 108 101 dong 101 (hereinafter “F building No. 101 of the first floor in Chungcheongnam-gun budget Group B”; hereinafter “instant real estate”) as a substitute. D, upon the Defendant’s consent, was unable to timely pay the price of supply, such as pressing, to E, the instant real estate to be received from the Defendant as a substitute, provided to E again with the Defendant.

In accordance with the three-party agreement between the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the D as above, the Defendant entered into a contract under which the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff designated by E around July 2013 sell the instant real estate at KRW 149,250,000 to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The instant sales contract is a seller, who is a stock company, but the actual seller is a stock company, and there is no dispute between the parties. However, the contract price that the Defendant should pay to D is the contract price to be paid by D.