1. Defendant B’s 60 million won and above amount to the Plaintiff:

(a) From July 5, 2016 to KRW 50,000;

(b) 10.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 1, 2016, Defendant C and D decided to construct a multi-household building on the land in Seongbuk-gu Seoul, Seongbuk-gu, Seoul, and concluded a contract on the construction of a new multi-household building with F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. The Plaintiff runs a construction business under the trade name G, and was awarded a subcontract for the part of civil engineering works among the instant construction works by F on April 4, 2016 (hereinafter “instant subcontract”).

C. The Plaintiff installed the H-BEAM (H-BAM) for civil engineering works at the construction site of this case pursuant to the instant subcontract agreement, but the construction was suspended due to the failure to receive the construction cost from F.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence No. 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the plaintiff's assertion

A. Defendant B loaned a construction business license from F to Defendant C, and concluded the instant contract with Defendant C, and entered into the instant subcontract with the Plaintiff.

On July 4, 2016, the time when the Plaintiff ceased construction work under the instant subcontract, Defendant B prepared a written confirmation of the remainder of construction costs that the remainder of the construction work that the Plaintiff had not received remains at KRW 50,000,000, which was the time of suspending the construction work.

Meanwhile, around June 20, 2017, the Plaintiff lent KRW 10,000,00 to Defendant B.

Therefore, Defendant B is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the interest or delay damages on each of the above amounts, including KRW 50,000,000 and the above loans, KRW 10,000,000 and KRW 10,000.

B. Around November 2016, Defendant C filed a claim against Defendant C, at will, thereby causing damage to the Plaintiff by arbitrarily removing the beam beamline installed at the construction site of this case, which constitutes a tort against the Plaintiff or an unjust enrichment against the Plaintiff.

Therefore, Defendant C generally takes place at the construction site among the costs of 22,447,500 of the sn beam beamline to the Plaintiff.