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. According to the record as to the legitimacy of the appeal for subsequent completion, the first instance court may recognize the fact that the defendant served a duplicate of the complaint of this case and the notice of the date for pleading of this case on April 12, 2017, and served the plaintiff's claim on April 12, 2017, and the original copy of the judgment also served on the defendant by public notice. The defendant becomes aware of the fact that the judgment of the first instance was rendered on May 25, 2017, and filed the appeal for subsequent completion on June 7, 2017.

Therefore, the Defendant’s failure to observe the peremptory period for filing an appeal is due to any cause not attributable to the Defendant. Therefore, an appeal arising from the subsequent completion of the instant case filed by the Defendant within two weeks from the date the Defendant became aware of the pronouncement of the judgment of the first instance is lawful by satisfying the requirements for subsequent completion of

2. The parties' assertion

A. On June 6, 2016, the Plaintiff supplied the materials equivalent to KRW 18.6 million at the Defendant’s request to the Plaintiff’s construction site near the Nowon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City E neighboring E.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the above material price and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. Defendant 1) did not perform a new construction work in the vicinity of Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Incheon. In the vicinity of the Bupyeong-gu, Incheon, the Defendant was merely performing a new construction work in the vicinity of the Bupyeong-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu (hereinafter “Seoul Bupyeong-gu”) (hereinafter “G site”) and the new construction site in the vicinity of the Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, Incheon.

2) In relation to G site, F awarded a contract for electrical construction, telecommunications, and fire fighting (hereinafter “electric construction”) to C, and C received materials from the Plaintiff and executed the said electrical construction.

Therefore, since the plaintiff supplied materials to non-indicted C, the defendant does not bear the duty to pay the material price to the plaintiff.

3 In relation to the field of Bupyeong, the Defendant is the Plaintiff.