1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

The plaintiff's assertion is as follows.

With respect to the construction of apartment houses of the Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 587-5 Madon-dong 587-5 Madon-dong Madon-dong Housing Association, the said housing association is an agent for the execution of the non-party Dodon chip Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "non-party company"), and the defendant was selected as a contractor and carried out the business

On November 27, 2008, Nonparty 1 Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Sesung Engineering”) entered into a contract for the removal and waste disposal related to the construction of the above apartment (hereinafter “the first consignment contract”) with the Nonparty Company, an executing agent.

The above entrustment contract is based on the order of the defendant, which is the actual owner of the non-party company, and the name engineering in the above contract agreed to pay 180 million won to the defendant as contract deposit money between the non-party company and the non-party company. The name engineering remitted the total amount of 180 million won to the deposit account of the union contribution in the name of the defendant.

(1) The Plaintiff (i.e., the Plaintiff) concluded a contract for removal and waste disposal of the same content as the first consignment contract (hereinafter “the second consignment contract”) with the Nonparty Company on April 9, 2012. In the process of the first consignment contract, the Plaintiff succeeded to the status of the party to the contract of the quality engineering pursuant to the first consignment contract under the first consignment contract. (ii) the Plaintiff succeeded to the status of the party to the contract of the quality engineering pursuant to the first consignment contract. (iii) the first consignment contract of the first consignment contract of the Plaintiff was concluded on May 2, 2011.

As of August 21, 2014, which was the date of the closing of argument in the instant case, the apartment reconstruction project was nonexistent, and each of the instant entrustment contracts was terminated.