1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the court of first instance.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 1, 2015, the Defendant: (a) contracted the project for the extension of a factory in Seongdong-gu, Inc. (hereinafter “instant construction”) to the Codefendants, Co-Defendants, Ltd., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co-Defendants,”) in the first instance trial; and (b) supplied the instant construction to the multiple comprehensive construction.

B. Around December 2015, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and the instant integrated construction agreed to pay the goods to be paid to the Plaintiff by the instant integrated construction in person to the Plaintiff.

(hereinafter “instant direct payment agreement”) C.

On December 28, 2015, the Plaintiff supplied 34,650,000 won to the Defendant, and on March 17, 2016, requested the Defendant to directly pay the price for the goods by sending the content-certified mail.

Meanwhile, from December 9, 2015 to December 24, 2015, the Defendant was served with a comprehensive debtor construction, a third debtor as the defendant, an amount of KRW 160,50,000, an amount of seizure of YY Co., Ltd., an obligee Co., Ltd., the amount of KRW 40,722,000, an obligee’s secondary seizure of claims amount of KRW 526,610,000, and the obligee’s school foundation as the obligee’s provisional seizure of claims amount of KRW 24,963,00, respectively.

E. On July 21, 2016, the Defendant deposited KRW 54,947,243 in Daejeon District Court Decision 2016, 2016, for the creditors of seizure and provisional seizure on the claim for construction price of this integrated construction.

E. A search and seizure construction project performed the construction project equivalent to the amount of the completed price of KRW 6,977,838,781, and the Defendant paid KRW 6,683,182,539, including the deposit money, to this comprehensive construction project.

The defendant has reserved KRW 294,656,242, which is the difference, as the name of direct payments, etc. for subcontractors.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 4, Eul evidence Nos. 7, 11 and 28 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Article 14 of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act (hereinafter “subcontract”).