1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The court's explanation of this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for dismissal or addition of some of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance as follows. Thus, the court's explanation of this case is acceptable by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, the third-party 8 and nine-party 9 are as follows.

“2) The Defendant transferred KRW 10,00,000 to the F’s account on July 31, 2018, KRW 20,000,00 on August 8, 2018, KRW 100,000 on August 13, 2018, KRW 120,000 on August 17, 2018, KRW 120,000 on August 17, 2018, and KRW 29,10,000 on September 21, 2018, respectively, the Defendant transferred the F’s account to the F’s account.” Of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, the Defendant additionally added the evidence No. 3 of the first instance judgment “as of December 4, 2018” as “as of December 5, 2018.”

Of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, the statement of No. 16 of the No. 16 "No. 7" shall be deemed "No. 7 and No. 17".

In full view of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, the first instance court’s first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s “in full view

Of the grounds of the judgment of the first instance, the following details shall be added between the fifth, sixth and seventh.

The plaintiff argues that he can seek a direct payment of the subcontract price to the defendant who is the ordering person pursuant to Article 14 (1) of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act, but in order for the subcontractor to directly claim the subcontract price on the basis of Article 14 (1) of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act, the subcontractor falls under the principal contractor pursuant to Article 2 (2) of the above Act and the subcontractor falls under the subcontractor pursuant to Article 2 (3) of the above Act. C does not assert or prove that the subcontractor falls under the principal contractor pursuant to Article 2 (2) of the above Act, or the plaintiff falls under the subcontractor pursuant to Article 2 (3) of the above Act.

In addition, C is a principal contractor under the above law.