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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

The fact-finding and judgment of the first instance court are justified to the effect that there is insufficient evidence as to whether there is a lack of payment equivalent to the amount claimed by the defendant.

Accordingly, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is as follows, except for adding the following supplementary judgments, and therefore, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. In the case of a settlement agreement made between the Plaintiff and the Defendant regarding the settlement of the subcontract price as to the unpaid portion of the construction cost, it cannot be ruled out that the Defendant, who formed such appearance, also has the effect of the settlement agreement, if the Defendant’s representative director’s seal impression was affixed by a third party (G) who lawfully kept the Defendant’s seal impression before the said settlement agreement was made, even if the Defendant’s representative director did not directly affix the seal thereto.

On the other hand, in a case where the above settlement agreement does not extend to the defendant, it is unclear whether the subcontracted work in this case was completed at the time of the suspension of the plaintiff's new construction work, as seen earlier, so in order to calculate the specific amount of the work cost on the part of the defendant, it is necessary to closely examine the total amount of the construction cost (such as the payment for the term and the details of outstanding amounts) claimed by the defendant in relation

In this regard, the defendant's total sum of outstanding amounts to the subcontractor is about 97.