1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff asserts that the defendant (B), as a contracting party to each of the instant construction works (D, E, F, G, H, and I), is obligated to pay KRW 75,350,00 to the defendant (C), while the defendant asserts that the share of the tax invoice issued in the name of the defendant among each of the instant construction works has already been settled, and the remaining construction works are deemed to have been carried out between the plaintiff and the non-party J (K), and the defendant does not have any liability to pay even if he knows the content thereof.

In this regard, even if Nonparty J ordered each of the instant construction works, the said J shall be deemed to have obtained a comprehensive power of attorney from the Defendant as the head of the Defendant’s on-site site. Accordingly, the obligation of construction payment shall belong to the Defendant, and the Defendant shall not set up against the obligation of construction payment against the Plaintiff on account of internal circumstances with J.

2. The evidence presented by the Plaintiff is most unilaterally prepared by the Plaintiff, and the evidence No. 2 (Dismissal) cannot be admitted as evidence due to lack of evidence to acknowledge the authenticity.

Ultimately, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant is a contracting party, that J was granted the comprehensive power of attorney from the Defendant, and that the payable amount is KRW 75,350,000, as alleged by the Plaintiff.

3. If so, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.