공사대금
1. The part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid under the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked.
2...
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff is a construction company that carries on the bowlinging business, etc., and the Defendant is a construction company that carries on civil engineering and construction business after obtaining a comprehensive construction business license under the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.
B. The Korea-U.S. Basic Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea-U.S. Basic Construction Co., Ltd.”) ordered Cmaria A&S Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea-U.S. Basic Construction Co., Ltd.”) to accept land construction from among urban-type housing construction projects (hereinafter “the instant land construction”) built on one parcel outside the Nam-gu Seoul Metropolitan City, Ulsan-si and the Nam-gu Construction Co., Ltd.
C. However, when Korea-U.S. Basic Construction was unable to award a contract for the construction work under its name due to a failure to hold a comprehensive construction business license, it borrowed the Defendant’s name to pay a part of the payment in the name of the Defendant, and entered into a subcontract for construction work with the payment of construction cost of KRW 3,167,952,00 (including value-added tax) between the general liquidation construction company and the general liquidation company.
Han-U.S. Basic Construction had D, one of its employees, employed as the Defendant’s employee on the documents related to the instant earth and sand work, and D, which was the head of the site of the instant earth and sand work, signed his/her signature on the work confirmation and operation log (a contract) from September 7, 2015 to September 15, 2015 with respect to the instant earth and sand file pressure (hereinafter “instant pressure entry”) during the instant earth and sand work.
E. The instant voltage was completed on September 2015, 201.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 4, 7, 8, and 16, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant, the primary cause of the Plaintiff’s primary claim, is the subcontract agreement on the pressure construction of the instant case (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).
36,750,000 won of the construction cost agreed at the time of the instant construction contract (excluding value-added tax) to the Plaintiff, a contractor, who has completed the said construction work, as a contractor.