The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The judgment below

According to the reasoning, the court below rejected the plaintiff's assertion that the direct payment agreement for the subcontract price of this case concluded between the plaintiff, Dong-JC Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "DonghoC") and the subcontractors of Dong-JC constitutes an assignment contract, and determined that the provisional attachment of this case, etc. in which creditors of Dong-JC with respect to the claim for the construction price of Dong-JC as well as Dong-JC,

Then, the court below rejected the reasoning of the judgment below, based on the order of priority in the provisional attachment of this case with the part excluding labor costs paid by the plaintiff directly to the subcontractor and the order of priority in the provisional attachment of this case, which affected 805,739,976 won. Since the contract of this case was terminated on August 3, 201 and the requirements for the deferred appropriation of advance payment were met, the plaintiff, a third debtor, could oppose the creditors, such as the provisional attachment of this case, but it did not preserve the above 805,739,976 won and then paid it to the subcontractor, which caused the direct cause of payment, thereby making it difficult for the plaintiff to receive advance payment, the defendant did not bear guarantee liability against the plaintiff, and further, the defendant did not bear the obligation to pay advance directly to the subcontractor.

Examining the record in light of the relevant legal principles, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the interpretation of a contract, the assignment of a claim, the specification of a claim subject to seizure, the occurrence of a guaranteed accident, the exemption from liability, and exceptional settlement agreements, or by omitting judgment.