1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff is engaged in V manufacturing, construction, etc. in the trade name “G” jointly with C, but registered as a business operator in the name of the Plaintiff.

On October 10, 2014, the Plaintiff and C concluded a contract for construction works with the representative director D of the Defendant Company B (hereinafter “Defendant B”) for the instant construction works of the H-si H Factory Construction (hereinafter “the instant construction works”), and entered into a verbal contract for construction works with the Plaintiff and the Defendant DD Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant DD Construction”), and the contract for construction works was entered into in the name of the Plaintiff and the Defendant DD Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant ED Construction”). The Defendant Emb integrated construction (hereinafter “Defendant Emb integrated construction”) agreed to direct and supervise the instant construction works and pay the construction cost.

The Plaintiff and C completed the instant construction and additional construction in accordance with the instant construction contract on December 10, 2014. The Defendants did not pay KRW 157,622,365 out of the construction cost.

2. As to who is a party to a contract in cases where an actor who executes a judgment contract was engaged in a juristic act in the name of another person, the parties to the contract shall first determine the offender or the nominal person as the party to the contract in accordance with the consent of the actor, if the actor and the other party agree with each other; and if the other party fail to agree with each other, based on the specific circumstances before and after the conclusion of the contract, such as the nature, content, purpose, and details of the contract, if there is any difference between the actor and the nominal person, the parties

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da31990, Sept. 6, 2007). According to the evidence No. 1, the construction cost as to the instant construction work between the Plaintiff and Defendant DD Construction is 625.