1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim as to the above cancellation part is dismissed.

1. The reasoning for this part of the basic facts is as follows, except for the addition or modification as follows, and therefore, it is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

In the second sentence of the judgment of the first instance, "4,784,659,00 won" shall be added to "(including value-added tax)" in the second sentence.

Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance is replaced by part 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance by "value-added tax".

Part 3 of the judgment of the first instance is replaced by "Class 1, 2, and 3" in Part 8.

On June 2017, 2017, Nos. 3 through 19 of the first instance judgment, “I. C, around June 2017, transferred the claim of KRW 400 million unpaid out of the construction price of the instant case to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “transfer of claim”), and on July 18, 2017, notified the Defendant of the instant transfer of claim.”

Part 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance is replaced by "including household numbers" by "branch numbers (hereinafter the same shall apply).

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion is obligated to pay the plaintiff the acquisition amount of KRW 400 million and damages for delay due to the assignment of the claim of this case.

B. The assignment of the instant claim by the Defendant constitutes a litigation trust, and is contrary to the special agreement prohibiting the assignment of the instant contract, and is null and void as it was performed by one corporation, even though it was a partnership bond.

Furthermore, even if the transfer of claims takes effect, the obligation for the construction cost of this case to be borne by the defendant in C and D is less than KRW 400 million, and there is no money that the defendant should pay when offsetting against the claim for repair of defects, the claim for return of unjust enrichment, the claim for compensation for damages, etc. possessed by C and D

3. Determination

A. In a case where the assignment of claims, etc. is primarily carried out to have a litigation trust act, even if the assignment of claims does not constitute a trust under the Trust Act, Article 7 of the Trust Act shall be applied mutatis mutandis, and the litigation shall be deemed null and void.