1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed with the Plaintiff KRW 53,700,000 and 5% per annum from April 1, 2015 to May 19, 2015.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person operating the tegrative business, and Defendant B (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) is a company selling precious metals, and Defendant C is a representative director of the Defendant Company.

B. On March 21, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the Defendant Company on a lot department D, set the construction cost at KRW 423,50,000, and completed the construction work on April 4, 2014.

C. On June 26, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for a construction project with a defendant company for a construction project and set the construction cost at KRW 429,00,000, and completed the construction project on July 25, 2014.

By June 5, 2014, the Defendant Company paid the Plaintiff totaling KRW 31,550,000 as construction price with respect to the foregoing interior works (hereinafter “instant construction works”).

E. The Defendants prepared and delivered to the Plaintiff a letter to the effect that the payment of KRW 53,700,000, which was unpaid on February 2, 2015, would be jointly and severally paid until March 31, 2015 (hereinafter “instant letter”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of recognition as above, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 53,700,000,000, which is the day following the due date for payment, and 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act from April 1, 2015 to May 19, 2015, which was served on the Defendants by the instant complaint, and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment.

B. (1) The Defendants claiming construction cost settlement did not accurately settle with the Plaintiff as to the instant construction work, and prepared each of the instant notes, and thus the instant statements are invalid. However, the testimony of the witness F alone is the procedure for settlement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Company with respect to the instant construction work.