1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 112,668,335 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and its related amount from August 28, 2014 to January 14, 2015.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. Basic facts

A. C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) was awarded a contract for the “E Corporation” on the ground D in Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Hyundai Construction Co., Ltd. (Seoul Co., Ltd.).

The Defendant received orders from C to “F Corporation” (hereinafter “instant construction”) and requested Daehan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) to perform the construction work at KRW 1.1 billion.

B. D Co., Ltd. entered into a subcontract on the instant construction project directly with C and started construction from February 2012, and started construction works for poppy installation works, and waived construction works around June 2012 and completed it at the construction site.

On July 1, 2012, the Defendant entered into a subcontract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) with C by setting the construction cost of KRW 1.4885 million with respect to the instant construction work, and entered into the subcontract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”). C written agreement with C, stating, “I will receive the amount for the construction work performed by Daehan, who is a time contractor during the instant construction work, and pay the amount for the indirect costs, as guaranteed by the Defendant, and at the time of the occurrence of the payable amount. I will undertake all rights and obligations with respect to advance payment received by D, and deliver a letter of advance payment that the Defendant acquired and used by D,” and written agreement with C, stating, “I will submit a written consent to the proposal, as I will not perform the construction work on the basis of the bid details and below or below.”

On July 1, 2012, the Plaintiff submitted a written estimate (hereinafter referred to as “instant estimate”) stating an estimated amount of KRW 950 million (excluding value-added tax) to the Defendant, and on July 2, 2012, the Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant entered into the instant re-subcontract with the representative director G at the time of the Defendant’s conclusion.

G seems to have used the name of the representative director as the defendant's office.