1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim corresponding to the above revocation part.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation as to this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except where the court cited the instant case as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since it stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. As long as the amount of wages calculated by the ordering person of the above construction work (including a contractor in cases of a subcontract) is limited to the amount specified in the contract or subcontract agreement, as long as the amount of wages and other construction expenses are not separated from the amount indicated in the contract or subcontract agreement, it shall not be deemed that the prohibition of seizure on the whole of the above contract price claims does not extend to 0.30 won if the amount of the claim subject to seizure is not formally demarcated by their own entry in the contract or subcontract itself at the time of issuing the seizure order (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2005Da10173, Jun. 24, 2005; 2005Da10173, Jun. 24, 2005; 2007Da10780, Nov. 28, 2008; 2005Da10740, Nov. 24, 2005; 2005Du1067, Nov. 4, 2007