1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 25,00,000 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from August 26, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 21, 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that KRW 25,000,000 of the construction cost claim against the Hanju Comprehensive Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”), and filed an application for payment order against the Nonindicted Co., Ltd. under the Suwon District Court’s Ansan Branch Branch Order No. 2015,1205.

The above court issued a payment order on April 30, 2015, and the above payment order was finalized on May 21, 2015 because the non-party company receiving the payment order did not raise an objection.

B. On June 10, 2015, the Plaintiff filed an application with the Suwon District Court for the seizure and collection order of the claim for the construction cost related to the building construction work located in Yangpo-si, Kimpo-si, Yangpo-si, Yangpo-si, Yangpo-si (hereinafter “instant construction”) against the Defendant of the non-party company on the title of execution of the said payment order (the claim amounting to KRW 25,00,000), as the title of the said payment order.

On June 12, 2015, the above court issued a seizure and collection order, and served the defendant on June 17, 2015.

(hereinafter “instant claim seizure and collection order”). 【Ground of recognition】 There exists no dispute, entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4, the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 25,000,000, and 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 August 26, 2015 to the date of full payment, clearly indicated that it is the day following the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case, according to the seizure and collection order of this case.

3. As to the judgment of the defendant's assertion, the defendant did not complete the construction work of this case by the date of completion stipulated in the original construction contract, and there was a delay in the construction work of the non-party company, and the non-party company was subject to provisional seizure and seizure from the subcontractor of the non-party company. The compensation for delay and the loss in lieu of the defect repair as mentioned above, are