물품대금
1. The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded in the trial are dismissed, respectively.
2. After an appeal is filed.
1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is identical to that of the part of the judgment, except for the part to be determined additionally by the following two, thereby citing this case’s argument by the court of first instance.
2. The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant assumed the obligation to the Plaintiff of the non-party company by preparing the instant direct payment agreement with the non-party company, but the non-party company and the Defendant agreed to pay KRW 73,578,305, out of the construction cost that the Defendant agreed to pay to the non-party company as the subcontractor of the instant construction to the non-party company as the price for ready-mixed. The mere fact that the non-party company and the Defendant drafted the instant direct payment agreement with the non-party company that stated that the non-party company would pay KRW 73,578,305, out of the construction cost that the Defendant would pay to the non-party company as the subcontractor of the instant construction to the non-party company is beyond
and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.
The plaintiff's assertion is without merit.
3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion. Thus, the plaintiff's claim extended in the plaintiff's appeal and the court of first instance is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.