A. The Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for a new construction work of multi-households from the Defendant (hereinafter “contractor”) to the attached Form and reinforced concrete construction work among the aforementioned new construction work.

B. Meanwhile, in relation to the payment of the Plaintiff’s subcontract price, a direct payment agreement in the attached Form No. 1 to which the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the contractor are a party was formulated.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence 1, 4 (including paper numbers), and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant shall pay any balance, such as the purport of the claim, out of the subcontract construction cost for which the Plaintiff did not receive according to the statement in Gap evidence 1.

B. The Defendant did not prepare the evidence No. 1 and did not know that the Plaintiff was subcontracted to the Defendant, and the contractor did not complete the construction work that was contracted by the Defendant, and there were various defects in the construction process (attached Form).

On the other hand, the construction contract with the contractor was terminated due to the contractor's breach of contract, such as the contractor's failure to undergo the completion inspection due to the defect.

Since mediation on disputes between the defendant and the contractor was established, the defendant was exempted from liability to the plaintiff in this case.

The subcontracted Corporation, in fact, was executed by E that it borrowed a license from the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff cannot respond to the request for more than one reason.

3. In addition to the statements in subparagraphs 4-1 and 2 of the evidence No. 4-1 and the whole purport of the pleadings, the defendant's assertion disputing the establishment of the petition is not acceptable, and the above direct payment agreement becomes effective against the defendant, since it is fully recognized that the defendant directly affixed to the preparation of the evidence No. 1 (direct payment agreement).

The other defendant's argument is without merit.

In addition to the defendant's separate argument, Gap evidence No. 5, Eul evidence No. 1 related to defects, the plaintiff added the whole purport of the pleadings.