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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The Plaintiff supplied goods equivalent to KRW 20,000,00, including automatic text, to the Defendant’s C site from August 31, 2016 to January 31, 2017 in accordance with the goods supply contract concluded with the Defendant. The Plaintiff should receive KRW 20,00,000, and delay damages therefrom from the Defendant.

B. The plaintiff was merely engaged in construction by re-afusing automatic writing installation works from D, which is the defendant's subcontractor, and there is no supply contract between the plaintiff and the defendant.

Therefore, the plaintiff cannot respond to the claim of this case.

2. In light of the following circumstances, i.e., evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and evidence No. 1 to the effect that the Defendant’s order for the goods supplied at the above construction site is not the Defendant’s employee, but the above construction site construction site is a separate construction business operator who was awarded a subcontract by the Defendant in a lump sum, it seems difficult for the Defendant to avoid the possibility of being a party to the above supply contract, and ② there is no clear disposition document proving the supply contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, in addition to the document unilaterally prepared by the Plaintiff, there is no document proving the supply contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, it is difficult to conclude that the Defendant, not a party to the above supply contract. There is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is not accepted.

3. The plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.