1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed to the Plaintiff KRW 21,020,000 per annum from February 13, 2014 to December 19, 2014.

The following facts are established: (a) around May 24, 2012: (b) Defendant B permitted Defendant B to enter into a construction contract under the name of the Defendant Company; (c) Defendant B entered into a construction contract with the Plaintiff as KRW 20,000 per square meter of construction cost under the name of the Defendant Company; (d) the construction contract for a retaining wall of convenience C Hospital located in Gwangju City (hereinafter “instant construction contract”); (c) the Plaintiff entered into the construction contract with the Plaintiff on July 14, 2012 in accordance with the said construction contract; (d) the Plaintiff entered the retaining wall construction works of KRW 1,301 square meters in accordance with the said construction contract; (e) the Defendant Company entered the instant construction contract with the Plaintiff as the price for the instant construction contract; (e) the Plaintiff did not have any dispute over the purport of KRW 1,00,000, KRW 14,000, KRW 200,000, KRW 300,000,00 each of the parties’ respective evidence or evidence paid.

(1) The Defendants asserted that the Defendant Company paid KRW 1,00,000 to the Plaintiff via E as the price for the instant construction contract, and that the Plaintiff paid KRW 1,00,000 to the Plaintiff as the price for the instant construction contract. However, the Defendants asserted that the Defendant Company paid KRW 1,00,000 to the Plaintiff on July 3, 2012, on the sole basis of the fact that the Defendant Company deposited KRW 10,000,000 to E, it cannot be deemed that the said money was paid to the Plaintiff as the price for the instant construction contract, and there is no evidence to support that the Defendant Company paid KRW 1,00,000 to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion is without merit.

The plaintiff asserted that the total amount of KRW 5,00,000,000 as seen earlier deposited by the defendant company to the plaintiff is the price for another construction contract concluded between the plaintiff and the defendant company, not the construction cost of this case, but there is no evidence to acknowledge this. Therefore, the plaintiff's

Ultimately, the defendant corporation is defendant B.