1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. On April 24, 2012, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including some numbers) comprehensively reveal the purport of the argument as a whole, the defendant has been awarded a contract with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation for one construction section of Seoul Urban Residential Housing Construction Project, and on April 16, 2012, the defendant paid the plaintiff the construction cost of the interior Bati Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Bati Corporation") out of the construction cost of KRW 240 million with the contract price of the interior Bati Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Bati Corporation") at KRW 30 million with the contract price of the construction cost of KRW 6,545,00,00,000 to the plaintiff.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. Since the Plaintiff’s direct payment agreement under the instant direct payment clause was lawful and effective by the head of the site office, a representative of the Defendant, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the construction cost to the Plaintiff without relation to whether the payment was made to the Sitetegian in accordance with the direct payment agreement.

Even if not, C has no power of representation.

Even if the defendant is liable to act as an expression agent under Article 126 of the Civil Code.

B. (1) When comprehensively considering the purport of the entire argument, the Defendant’s argument is examined.