1. The following amounts among the parts against Defendant A corporation in the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 8, 2007, the Plaintiff engaged in the windows, steel products construction business, etc. entered into a contract for construction with C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”), with which the Plaintiff would accept a subcontract for construction cost of KRW 525,00,00 (excluding value-added tax) from among the new construction works in the e-construction works located in Jeonnam-gun D, Jeonnam-gun (hereinafter “E new construction works”), and that the Plaintiff would accept a subcontract for the construction cost of KRW 525,00,000 (value-added tax) from among the construction works in the construction works in the Ga located in the Yusung-gun, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and the construction works in the construction of the Gatel on the ground other than Suwon-si, Suwon-si, Seoul-si, and the construction work that the Plaintiff would accept a subcontract for the construction cost of KRW 1,150,00,000 (value-added tax).

B. As a result of the failure to pay to C, the Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant A Co., Ltd”) paid to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 36,60,000 for the construction work for the new E construction work recognized by C (i.e., value-added tax of KRW 306,00,000 for the construction work amount of KRW 306,60,000 for the construction work amount) and KRW 794,000 for the construction work amount of KRW 794,00,000 for the new construction work amount of KRW 734,000 for the construction work amount of KRW 60,000 for the value-added tax of KRW 60,000 for the construction work amount of KRW 734,000 for the construction work amount of KRW 60,000 for the value-added tax of KRW 00,000 for the construction work

The defendant company already paid value-added tax on the E-new construction among the value-added tax on each of the above existing construction cost, and argued that the value-added tax on G construction is not borne by the defendant company. However, it is exceptional that the defendant company did not separately accept only the value-added tax when accepting the obligation to pay the construction cost, and that there is no particular circumstance that the defendant company did not bear value-added tax, and that H, the management director of the defendant company, signed on the subcontract settlement statement (Evidence B) stating the construction cost, including value-added tax, with respect to G construction.