1. The Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 72,00,000 and the annual rate of KRW 15% from November 25, 2017 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 10, 2012 and October 14, 2015, the Defendant and C drafted a contract under which the Defendant contracted to C for the civil works on the factory site and 12 parcels outside D in Jin-si and 12 parcels (hereinafter “instant construction works”).

B. On December 11, 2015, the Defendant drafted a memorandum of execution to C related to the instant construction project.

(C) Around March 2016, the Plaintiff requested the payment of construction cost by sending the instant field photographs to the Defendant and paying KRW 20 million to C. On August 30, 2016. D. On the same day, C concluded a bond transfer contract with the purport of transferring KRW 72 million out of the construction cost of the instant case to the Plaintiff on August 30, 2016, and on the same day, the Defendant notified the Defendant of the assignment of the claim on the same day [the remainder KRW 72 million from the recognition of the claim, KRW 42 million, and KRW 1,200,000,000,000,000,000 from the date of the completion of the earth and sand transfer contract.”

2. Determination

A. In full view of the images of Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 6 (including each number), the testimony of witnesses C, and the purport of the whole pleadings as to the cause of the claim, it is recognized that the earth and sand removal work completed around 2016, and the images of Eul evidence No. 3 do not interfere with the above recognition.

The Defendant paid to C the balance of the construction price of KRW 72 million after the completion of the earth and sand removal work. As seen in the facts established earlier, the Plaintiff acquired the claim for the construction price as above. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to pay the said KRW 72 million to the Plaintiff, the transferee of the above claim for the construction price, and the delay damages therefrom.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant, even after receiving the payment for civil engineering works, threatened the Defendant.