1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s main claim is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) is about 41,551.

1. As seen earlier on April 2012, the Plaintiff: (a) newly constructed two buildings (hereinafter “instant building”) on the land of 477 square meters and 00 square meters on the land of 200 square meters in Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu; and (b) 31, April 2012; (c) the construction period from April 31, 2012 to the same year.

8. By 30. Up to 30. Construction cost was determined as KRW 1,155,00,000 (including value-added tax) and completed the construction work (hereinafter “instant contract”). On May 9, 2013, approval for use of the instant building was completed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 3-1, 2, Gap evidence 7-1 and 7-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of the principal claim

A. The obligation to pay the construction cost to the contractor is indivisible in its nature. The following circumstances revealed in full view of Gap evidence No. 1, evidence No. 4-1, and evidence No. 4-2 and the overall purport of arguments, namely, ① Defendant B and the parent-child of Defendant C could have been involved in the process of entering into and implementing the instant contract, and ② The construction contract document (Evidence No. 1) entered into around April 2012, written by the contractor of the instant construction was written as the Plaintiff and the contractor as the owner of the instant contract. Since the contract was written as of April 2012, the contractor of the instant construction was written as the Plaintiff, the contractor, the Plaintiff, the construction price of the Plaintiff, the contractor, 495,000,000 won (including value-added tax) written as the contract document for the construction work (including evidence No. 4-2) written as well as the contract document for the construction work entered as the Plaintiff and the Defendants No. 201,000,000.