1. The defendant shall pay 144,00,000 won to the plaintiff and 20% per annum from July 23, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 4, 2013, the Plaintiff, who performs machinery and equipment construction works under the trade name “B”, entered into a subcontract with the Defendant and C (Facility) by setting the construction period from April 1, 2013 to December 30, 2013 as the contract price of KRW 350 million (value-added tax separate) and the contract price of KRW 350 million (value-added tax separate).

(hereinafter “instant construction project” and “instant subcontract”). B.

On June 19, 2014, the Defendant prepared and delivered a payment note to the Plaintiff, stating that “The Defendant promised to pay the balance of KRW 174 million out of the construction price in the instant case by July 10, 2014,” and that “the payment shall be made by July 10, 2014.”

(hereinafter referred to as “instant letter of payment”). C.

On June 21, 2014, the Defendant paid KRW 30 million to the Plaintiff.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 and 2, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the remainder of the construction cost of KRW 174 million, excluding the remainder of KRW 30 million, which was already paid, and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from July 23, 2014 to the date of complete payment, which is the day following the delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order, to the day of full payment.

3. Judgment on the defendant's defense

A. As to this issue, the Defendant asserts that the contract price in this case paid to the Plaintiff KRW 30 million on April 30, 2013, KRW 110 million on June 28, 2013, KRW 50 million on September 17, 2013, KRW 15 million on May 12, 2014, KRW 10 million on June 13, 2014, and KRW 245 million on June 21, 2014, the above amount should be deducted from the contract price.

The facts that the Defendant paid each of the above amounts to the Plaintiff are not disputed between the parties, but can be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the statements in the evidence Nos. 3 and 4, i.e., the Plaintiff and the Defendant, in addition to the instant subcontract, shall also be D Corporation (Facility