1. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

A. The Plaintiff paid KRW 21,509,739 to C Co., Ltd., and simultaneously paid KRW 21,509,739.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. A. Around April 2017, the Defendant contracted with D for a new construction of the Gangnam-gu Seoul E-ground Neighborhood Facilities and Officetel buildings (hereinafter “instant building”) from D (hereinafter “instant building”) for the same year:

5.1. 1. Subcontract to C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) for removal, civil engineering and structural construction (hereinafter “subcontract”) at KRW 270,000,000 (excluding value-added tax).

(hereinafter “instant subcontract”). (b)

C On May 25, 2017, the Plaintiff re-subcontracted the construction cost of the subcontracted construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) at KRW 64 million (value-added tax separate), and provided that the down payment shall be paid in cash within 15 days after the completion of retaining wall work from the 26th of the same month until the completion of the work, and the progress payment shall be paid in cash.

C. Around May 25, 2017, the Plaintiff started the instant construction, but C does not pay the down payment.

6. Around 16. The construction was suspended.

The plaintiff, after that, resumes the construction with the defendant's promise to pay the construction cost on behalf of the defendant unless C pays the construction cost.

7.7. The construction of this case was completed around July.

On August 2017, the Defendant terminateded C and subcontracted construction work.

Since the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the construction cost, and the Defendant had the concerns over double payment, demanding the Plaintiff to receive a written consent for direct payment from C.

Accordingly, on August 3, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a written statement of direct payment that “The Defendant agrees to pay the instant construction cost directly to the Plaintiff.”

E. On August 10, 2017, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice claiming the construction cost of the instant case to the person who received a copy of the business registration certificate from the Defendant, following which the Plaintiff received the copy of the business registration certificate.

F. On July 24, 2017, the Defendant F, at the time of telephone conversations with the Plaintiff’s representative director G.