1. Defendant B’s KRW 10,000,000 as well as 5% per annum from June 20, 2013 to February 16, 2016 to the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 7, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction works with Defendant B (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the content that the interior interior interior interior interior decoration of the second floor of the D ground building in Jeonju-si (hereinafter “instant construction works”) was awarded for KRW 85,00,000 for the construction cost (hereinafter “instant contract”).

B. The Plaintiff completed the instant construction, and Defendant B opened the Lestop on March 5, 2013.

C. Defendant B paid the Plaintiff KRW 75,000,000 in total as the construction cost of the instant case.

【Facts without dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The remainder of the Corporation’s claim

A. (1) The plaintiff's assertion is the holder of the instant contract and the party, and the defendant C is the actual party to the said contract.

However, even if not, the Defendants are partners with respect to the instant construction for the instant Lestop business.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the remainder of the construction cost of this case to the Plaintiff.

(2) First of all, according to the facts of the above recognition as to the claim against Defendant B, Defendant B, as the contractor of the instant contract, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction cost of KRW 10,000,000 and damages for delay.

Next, it is not sufficient to recognize that Defendant C is a party to the instant contract or as having a business relationship with Defendant B solely on the basis of the descriptions as to the claim portion against Defendant C, as indicated in the Evidence Nos. 19 through 22, the witness C’s partial testimony, and the circumstances alleged by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion against the defendant C is without merit.

B. (1) Determination of the assertion on the deduction of the cost of repair of defects (1) Defendant B’s assertion (1) installed the Plaintiff at the inside of the river, the main stream, after the instant Lestop Taga.