2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff completed the construction of the purification tank and the facility for the second and second floor toilets (hereinafter “construction of the septic tank and the facility for the sanitation”).

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute]

2. As to the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff asserts to the effect that he concluded a contract for the purification of this case and the construction of sanitary equipment with the Defendant’s employee C who represented by the Defendant, and sought payment of the construction cost, such as the purport of the claim

As to whether the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction with the Defendant, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the contract only with the statement of evidence No. 1, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Rather, in full view of the statements in Eul evidence 1-1 to 13 and the purport of the entire pleadings in witness D’s testimony, the Plaintiff is acknowledged to have been awarded a subcontract for the construction of the instant septic tank and sanitary equipment from D who was awarded a contract for the said remodeling work by the Defendant, and the Plaintiff was issued a tax invoice in the process at D’s request.

Therefore, without examining the remainder of the construction cost, the Plaintiff’s assertion on the premise that the Plaintiff was directly awarded a contract for construction of the instant septic tank and the sanitation equipment from the Defendant.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.