1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 30,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from September 10, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 1, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into an agreement with Defendant B, representing Defendant A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”), to perform civil engineering works, etc. (hereinafter “instant construction works”) among urban-type residential housing construction works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) located in Ansan-si, the amount of KRW 40 million (hereinafter “instant construction contract”), and around that time, the instant construction works were carried out.

Defendant B served as an auditor of the Defendant Company from November 13, 2014 to December 10, 2015.

B. On behalf of the Defendant Company, on December 31, 2015, Defendant B entered into an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company to pay KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff by April 30, 2015 (hereinafter “instant agreement”). Defendant B guaranteed the agreement.

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

2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant company

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant Company concluded the instant agreement with the authority to act on behalf of the Defendant Company. As such, the Defendant Company is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the agreed amount of KRW 30 million and delay damages therefrom in accordance with the instant agreement. 2) Even if the Defendant Company did not have the authority to conclude the instant agreement on behalf of the Defendant Company, the Defendant Company granted all the power of representation on the instant construction to the Defendant Company, and there was justifiable reason to believe that the Plaintiff had the authority to act on behalf of the Defendant Company B.

Therefore, the defendant company is responsible for acting as an expression agent.

B. As to the instant case’s assertion on acting representation, the fact that Defendant B had all the authority to act on behalf of the Defendant Company regarding the conclusion of the instant construction contract and the progress of the instant construction project is not a dispute between the parties.

However, in the lawsuit of this case, the plaintiff is paid the construction cost of this case.