1. The defendant's appeal and the request for return of provisional payment are all dismissed.

2. Expenses for filing an appeal, and those for filing an application for the return of provisional payments.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is identical to that of the 2nd judgment of the first instance, the 6th judgment, and the 18th judgment, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the non-party company delayed the payment of the construction machinery rent under the instant lease agreement at least twice, and the Plaintiff requested the Defendant, who is the ordering person, to pay the construction machinery rent directly. Thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the rent to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 35(2)3 of the Framework Act

In addition, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant should pay the rent to the Plaintiff according to the agreement on May 27, 2014, which appears to be below, should not be determined as long as receiving the Plaintiff’s direct claim for payment.

B. At the time of the Defendant’s claim for direct payment of the Plaintiff’s alleged rent, the Defendant did not remain at the time of the Defendant’s claim for the payment of the construction cost that the Defendant had to pay to the Nonparty Company. Since there was an advance payment that the Defendant would have to receive upon termination and settlement of the contract with the Nonparty Company around February 25, 201

3. Determination

A. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts are recognized in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 9, 10, 13, and 17:

(1) On January 28, 2014, Nonparty Company sent to the Defendant an official document stating that “I would request the payment of a total amount of KRW 593 million with (t) an urgent fund before life saving, even though there was no final agreement on the amount of the request for design change at the time of the party,” as the title of the request for an urgent fund before the Gu administration.”

(2) On February 26, 2014, Nonparty Company: (a) notified the Defendant of the occurrence of the cause for termination of the contract, based on the title “1) delay in design change; (b) failure to pay subcontract consideration; (c) failure to pay advance payment; and (d) failure to pay bill discount charges.”