1. The Defendants jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff KRW 34,400,000 and Defendant B with respect thereto from June 22, 2014; and Defendant C with respect to the same.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a business operator engaged in interior, metal construction, etc. with the trade name of “D”. Defendant B is a representative of “E” who performs interior, landscaping, etc., and Defendant C is an actual operator thereof.

On November 19, 2012, the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for 68 million won of the construction cost of the telemet metal works in Suwon-si F from E, Suwon-si, and thereafter completed the said construction works (hereinafter “instant construction”).

With respect to the payment of the instant construction cost, on December 29, 2012, Defendant B prepared a note of payment that “on the completion of construction works, Defendant B would pay KRW 37.5 million in the balance of the price” (hereinafter “each of the instant notes”) to the Plaintiff on December 29, 2012. [Grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, each of the entries in Gap 1 through 4 (including serial number), and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, Defendant C is the actual operator of the subcontracted construction of this case, and Defendant B is jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff as the originator of this case, and the Plaintiff is jointly and severally liable to pay 30,440,000 won, less the amount deemed to have been paid by the Plaintiff, out of the construction cost of this case and the amount of each letter of this case, and damages for delay calculated on July 2, 2014, which was served on the Defendants by the duplicate of the complaint (Defendant B, June 22, 2014; Defendant C, on July 3, 2014, prior to the delivery of the duplicate of the complaint to the above Defendant. As such, Defendant C first submitted the written objection on July 2, 2014, at least on July 2, 2014, deeming that the duplicate of the complaint was served on July 3, 2014, to the next day after the delivery of the duplicate of the complaint) to the day of complete payment.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.