공사대금
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. Paragraph 3 of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance concerning the instant case is stated by the court.
The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for cases where the part of the title (from the third to the 9th reduction below) (from the 7th to the 9th reduction), and such part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article
A person shall be appointed.
C. As to Defendant B’s assertion, the summary of Defendant B’s assertion on invalidation under Article 104 of the Civil Act is as follows: (a) although Defendant B did not start his sewage supply construction work and there was no concern that it would not be paid the construction cost; (b) the conclusion of the first instance trial’s joint Defendant C (hereinafter “C”) only remains at the end of the two-day period, and the conclusion of the two-day period, concluding the instant payment guarantee with the Plaintiff on the entire claim for the construction cost, including the Plaintiff’s c’s c’s c’s c’s c’s c’s c’s c
Therefore, the payment guarantee of this case is null and void pursuant to Article 104 of the Civil Act.
B) We examine the judgment and find it difficult to view that C’s conclusion of the instant payment guarantee in the name of Defendant B solely based on the written evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5 (including serial numbers), and the witness E’s testimony and examination result by the witness E as well as the examination result by C does not constitute an act of significantly losing fairness, and there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that C had been in the state of old-age, rashness, or in the state of experience at the time, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Rather, according to the aforementioned evidence, C appears to have considerable experience and knowledge in the construction or construction contract as a person in charge of the field management of the instant construction project as a person in charge of the field management of the instant construction project. Accordingly, this part of the allegation by Defendant B is without merit) or the co-defendant A (hereinafter “A”).
The payment ability of A has not been properly notified.