1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 26,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from June 16, 2016 to the day of complete payment.

1. The judgment of the Defendant on the cause of the claim was awarded a subcontract to the Doldo Construction Construction Co., Ltd., which was made for the Doldo Construction Co., Ltd., which was located in Doldo-gun, and the Doldo Construction Co., Ltd. was awarded a subcontract for the Doldo Construction Co., Ltd.,

On August 10, 2015, the Defendant drafted a written statement of direct payment that “Labor Cost of KRW 23,640,000 directly paid labor cost” to the Plaintiff, a subcontractor of the interior site construction, and the Plaintiff completed the subcontracted construction work.

[Grounds for recognition] A-3 and 5 evidence, and the purport of the entire pleadings is that the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the subcontract price of KRW 23,640,00 and value-added tax of KRW 2,364,00 (not contesting the Defendant with regard to separate payment of value-added tax) and the above amount to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from June 16, 2016 to the date of full payment.

2. The defendant's assertion that the defendant's payment of the price according to the statement of direct payment is limited to the "labor cost", the payment of the price was made to the piracy Construction Co., Ltd., and the construction cost was not received from the ordering person due to the defects in the construction.

According to the above evidence, the plaintiff was awarded a subcontract from Dai Construction Co., Ltd. which estimated construction cost of KRW 23,640,00 (excluding value-added tax) including material cost and labor cost of KRW 23,640,00, and even though the "agreement on non-employment in labor" is indicated, it is recognized that the amount of direct payment is specified as KRW 23,640,000 as that of the plaintiff's subcontract price. Therefore, the scope of the plaintiff's right to claim direct payment due to

Next, there is no evidence that the defendant paid the construction cost related to the interior construction to the Dalung Construction Co., Ltd., and the plaintiff's right to claim direct payment against the defendant.