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. On February 2015, the Plaintiff asserted that the construction cost for toilets, water supply and drainage, etc. in the Incheon City C market was paid to the Defendant for KRW 2.95 million.

As the Plaintiff completed the above construction on May 10, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendant for the payment of the construction cost and the damages for delay.

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap 1-1, 2, Gap 2-1-3, 3-5, 7-9, 13, and Eul 2.

1) From around 2003 to 2016, the Defendant shall set up a “C market prosperity conference” (hereinafter “C market prosperity”).

(2) Around February 2015, the Defendant entrusted the Plaintiff with construction, such as toilet water supply and drainage, of the building C market prosperity conference.

B. First of all, the parties to the contract of toilet construction work are deemed to be accused.

In light of the following circumstances revealed by the evidence and the facts of recognition as mentioned in the above paragraph (a), namely, it appears that the object of the construction falls under the section for common use of an aggregate building as a toilet in the C market prosperity building; the merchant of the C market prosperity Association filed a complaint against the defendant in an investigative agency by voluntarily consuming the toilet construction cost after receiving the toilet construction cost from the defendant including management expenses; there is a possibility that the C market prosperity Association constitutes a management body under the Act on Ownership and Management of Condominium Buildings; the plaintiff also claims that the defendant was responsible for the construction of the C market prosperity Association building and the plaintiff filed the lawsuit of this case by not paying the construction cost to the plaintiff even after receiving the payment from the merchants; it cannot be ruled out that the defendant contracted the toilet construction to the plaintiff as the representative of the C market prosperity Association

There is no evidence to deem that the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to pay the toilet construction in his personal capacity.

The defendant's contract for construction works.