1. The Defendant’s KRW 17,834,888 as well as the Plaintiff’s KRW 6% per annum from October 29, 2011 to November 26, 2013.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a manufacturer and installer of steel structure between “C”, and the Defendant is a two-way subcontractor of “D” trade name.

B. On November 12, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract on the following matters with the Defendant regarding the new construction of a stable on the land outside E and one parcel (hereinafter “instant stable”).

Commencement: The method of payment of the purchase price of KRW 175,00,00 (excluding value-added tax): The method of payment of the purchase price of KRW 175,00,000 (excluding value-added tax): The matters under a special contract for cash payment (payment simultaneously with the receipt of the purchase price of the project at the same time) within 15 days after the completion of the construction: the public works and management Dong (hereinafter “instant management Dong”) (hereinafter “instant management Dong”) shall be settled after execution and paid in cash.

C. Around February 2011, the Plaintiff completed the instant stable and management Dong construction. The Defendant paid the Plaintiff KRW 190,000,000 as construction price, and KRW 10,000,00 as of March 10, 201, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's entries or videos, and the purport of the whole pleadings, as a whole, of Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply)

2. The defendant's judgment on the defense prior to the merits of this case is a defense prior to the merits that the plaintiff filed the lawsuit in violation of his jurisdiction, and thus, the plaintiff's performance of obligations other than delivery should be made at the present address or place of business of the creditor (Article 467 (2) of the Civil Act). Thus, the place where the defendant would pay the plaintiff the construction cost of the stable and management operation of this case, i.e., the place where the plaintiff would pay the plaintiff the construction cost of the stable and management operation of this case, i.e., the domicile or place of business of the plaintiff (e., the Nam-gu F at port). Since the lawsuit on the property right can be brought to the court of the place where the obligation is performed (Article

Therefore, the defendant's defense prior to the above merits is without merit.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. The settlement of the construction cost of the livestock penss of this case (1).