1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 22,00,000 as well as 20% per annum from May 9, 2015 to the day of complete payment.

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The following facts can be acknowledged in light of the overall purport of the arguments in each statement of evidence Nos. 1 to 4, and there is no reflective evidence.

(1) On October 17, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to accept the following works from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”).

Site Location: The name of the subcontracted project for the construction of the building project for the construction of the C-family housing or the officetel: The contract price for the basic reinforcement and the construction period for the construction of the household facilities from October 20, 2014 to October 25, 2014 (six days): the payment of the construction cost of KRW 16 million (excluding value-added tax): The Plaintiff completed the construction within the construction period under the instant contract within 30 days after the completion of the construction.

(3) While the Plaintiff was performing the said construction, the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to perform the additional construction work, which is KRW 4 million for the construction cost (excluding value-added tax) and completed the said additional construction work.

B. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of the construction cost and the additional construction cost under the instant contract and the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from May 9, 2015 to the day of full payment, which is the day following the day of delivery of the instant complaint filed by the Plaintiff.

2. The defendant's assertion and its determination are true that the defendant's conclusion of the contract of this case with the plaintiff was made, but the defendant renounced the construction work and subsequently performed subcontracted construction work under the contract with the plaintiff, and the defendant did not have any fact that the contract of this case was entered into with the plaintiff.

However, unlike the above facts admitted, there is no evidence to prove the defendant's assertion, and the defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

3. Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is accepted for reasons of the conclusion.