The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 10, 2009, the Plaintiff, who was engaged in the tegrying construction business, etc. with Defendant B, entered into a contract with the Corporation for the construction cost of KRW 153,700,000 (excluding value-added tax) for the F Hospital 2,33 stories in Seo-gu Incheon Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant construction work”) and from April 8, 2009 to May 8, 2009 (hereinafter “instant construction contract”); the down payment of KRW 60 million out of the construction cost; the intermediate payment of KRW 50,000,000 until April 27, 2009; and the intermediate payment of KRW 43,70,000 until April 24, 2009; and the remainder of KRW 400,009.

5.8. The Agreement was agreed to receive each time limit until 8.

Since then, on April 27, 2009, the Plaintiff and Defendant B agreed to reduce the construction cost as KRW 135,464,760.

B. While the Plaintiff was implementing the instant construction, the construction was suspended around May 2009 on the ground that Defendant B did not pay part payments.

On October 15, 2009, the Defendants agreed to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 8 million out of the balance of the construction cost, and the remaining KRW 44.3 million to the Plaintiff within 20 days after completion of the construction work. On October 19, 2009, the Defendants paid KRW 8 million to the Plaintiff.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 evidence, Eul evidence 1-1 to 13, the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The parties’ assertion that the Plaintiff completed all the construction works by November 4, 2009, and that on March 15, 2010, the completion works were completed. Thus, the Defendants asserted that they are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the balance of the construction cost of KRW 4.3 million and the damages for delay.

With respect to this, the Defendants were only 20 to 30% of the instant construction work, and there was no progress even thereafter, and there was no contact between them around November 2009, and the Defendants completed the instant construction work by entering into a contract with another artificial construction business operator thereafter, and thus, there was no obligation to pay the balance of the said construction work cost.