1. The Defendants jointly and severally agreed with the Plaintiff KRW 59,468,890, and 6% per annum from January 1, 2013 to January 2, 2015.

1. According to the overall purport of Gap evidence 1-1 and 2 as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiff agreed to pay the plaintiff the total construction cost of KRW 65 million to the plaintiff on June 31, 2012 by December 31, 2012, after being awarded a contract for the reinforcement work of T.T.P. among D's extension work, but it was not paid KRW 25 million out of the construction cost. The construction work of E's extension work of arrival and F's extension work was completed, but it was not paid KRW 40 million out of the construction cost. The defendant Eul agreed to pay the plaintiff the total construction cost of KRW 65 million to the plaintiff on December 31, 2012, and the fact that the defendant Eul guaranteed the above joint and several liability of the defendant Eul.

Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 59,468,890, and its delay damages, except for the remainder of KRW 5,531,110, which the Plaintiff had received reimbursement for the said construction cost.

2. The Defendants’ assertion against the Defendants asserts that, on February 7, 2013, 2013, the Korea-style Law Firm Hancheon Construction Co., Ltd exempted the Defendants from the Defendants’ obligations to the Plaintiff, and that on February 7, 2013, the Plaintiff’s claim is unjust.

However, Article 454 of the Civil Act provides that, in cases where a third party assumes an obligation based on a contract with the obligor and discharges the obligor’s obligation, it shall take effect against the obligee only with the consent of the obligee. Thus, in cases where the obligee does not consent, the obligor and the underwriter may not be exempt from the obligation even if they have made an agreement on the assumption of obligation with the obligor

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da88303 Decided May 24, 2012). Moreover, if the assumption of an obligation overlaps with the assumption of an obligation, it is on the interpretation of the intent of the parties indicated in the assumption of an obligation.