1. The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 103,012,384 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from July 26, 2017 to the day of full payment.

1. Under the underlying facts, the following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1-6.

The plaintiff is a company that constructs steel reinforced concrete works, and the defendant is a company that constructs housing.

B. On May 27, 2016, the Defendant concluded the instant subcontract with the Plaintiff on May 27, 2016 with respect to the structural frame, steel bars, ready-mixeds, and non-drawing construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) after being awarded a contract with C (hereinafter “Nonindicted Company”) for a new construction of the three or five-story neighborhood living facilities in Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Seoul, and entered into the instant subcontract with the Plaintiff. The main contents are as follows.

Payment of contract amount of 913,00,000 won from May 27, 2016 to August 31, 2016 (the supply price of KRW 83,00,00,000, labor cost of KRW 419,345,714, value-added tax of KRW 83,00,00): No down payment; the completed payment shall be made once a month; the cash amount of 100% within 40 days from the date of the claim for the flag as of the end of the month; the items and quantities of the payment materials for which no penalty is paid: The rate of compensation for delay, such as electricity, water, steel bars, ready-mixed, and short heat: 3/100

C. After entering into the instant subcontract contract, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant a net schedule (Evidence A 4) that agreed on the date of actual process with respect to the instant construction work, which was concluded between the Defendant and the Defendant, on June 2016.

On the other hand, when the construction period of this case was delayed, on August 30, 2016, the original and the Defendant changed the completion period of the construction from the subcontract of this case to October 31, 2016, but again changed the completion period to October 31, 2016.

E. On December 31, 2016, the instant construction works completed the final process of removing the rooftop structures.

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff 1’s assertion that the construction of the instant case was delayed due to the Defendant’s fault. Accordingly, the Plaintiff incurred loss of input costs due to the delay, cancellation, etc. of concrete typology.