1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The parties' assertion

A. On August 24, 2015, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) requested the Defendant to install advertising materials such as C department stores, etc. located in Jung-gu, Seoul (hereinafter “instant construction”) from August 24, 2015 to September 23, 2015; and (b) completed the construction under the said contract around that time, at the request of the Defendant for construction period of KRW 8,520,00.

Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction cost of KRW 8,520,000 and the delayed payment damages.

B. The summary of the defendant's assertion is that the defendant ordered the construction work of this case to the business entity D and did not have ordered the construction work of this case directly to the plaintiff. Thus, the defendant does not have the duty to pay the construction

2. Considering the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff performed the instant construction work according to the construction contract concluded with D, in view of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 6 and Nos. 3, 4, 8, and 10 (including paper numbers) as follows.

① The Defendant made an oral order to D for a photograph replacement work set up in the department store columns, etc., including the instant construction, and issued a tax invoice of KRW 14,300,000 as the amount of May 31, 2015, and the amount of KRW 14,30,000 as the amount of June 30, 2015, and the amount of KRW 14,080,00 as the amount of August 1, 2015, and paid KRW 67,214,00 as the total amount of KRW 4,00 from June 1, 2015 to September 4, 2015.

② From July 2, 2015 to August 31, 2015, the Plaintiff was paid KRW 8,302,00 as the price for construction.

③ The Defendant filed a criminal complaint against E, etc., asserting that E, the representative director of the Defendant, issued false construction orders and false tax invoices, thereby causing damage to the Defendant, and subsequently, the transaction with D was terminated, and the Plaintiff completed business registration regarding outdoor and exhibition advertising with the trade name “F” on September 14, 2015, and the Defendant ordered the Plaintiff to install advertisements directly on September 14, 2015 and ordered the Plaintiff to supply the Plaintiff as the supplier.