Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked, and

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The defendant is a common defendant C Co., Ltd. (formerly: D Co., Ltd.; hereinafter referred to as "C") in the first instance trial.

The defendant is a substantial construction business operator who carries out the new construction of apartment units on the land, both E and 4, and entered into a contract with the plaintiff in the name of the Dispute Resolution Co., Ltd. to subcontract the damp type construction of the new construction project with the amount of KRW 170 million in the name of the plaintiff.

The plaintiff completed the construction, and if the construction cost is added to KRW 16 million, the construction cost is KRW 186 million.

The Defendant paid KRW 14 million among them, and paid KRW 50 million to the Plaintiff by way of transferring ownership of the newly constructed apartment bonds (F heading F) to the Plaintiff. As such, the Defendant is obliged to pay the remainder of the construction cost (=186 million won - KRW 164 million) to the Plaintiff.

B. The plaintiff also received a request from the defendant and the defendant Jinyang-gun G lending Co., Ltd. to perform the construction work, and the construction cost was 5.5 million won. Since the defendant's wife H was deposited in the defendant's wife H, the defendant shall pay the remaining construction cost of 3.5 million won to the plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. At Sacheon-si I’s remainder of damp Construction Works, the following facts can be acknowledged by taking into account the following facts: Gap’s evidence of 1 to 4, Eul’s evidence of 1 to 8, and the purpose of the J’s testimony and alteration as a whole:

A) On September 2, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Plaintiff for a subcontracting of KRW 170,000,000 (hereinafter “instant subcontract”). Paragraph (1) of the subcontract agreement entered into at the time of the instant subcontract agreement (hereinafter “instant subcontract agreement”) (hereinafter “instant contract”), which was entered into on September 2, 2015, the apartment house on the ground, E, and D-based (hereinafter “K”). The Plaintiff appears to have entered into a contract for a subcontracting of KRW 170,000 (the name of the Defendant).