The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff corresponding to the order to pay below shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is engaged in construction business, such as windows and metals, with the trade name of “C”, and the Defendant is engaged in construction business, landscaping business, etc. with the trade name of “D”.

B. On May 13, 2016, the District Office of Education and the Defendant entered into a contract on the basis of the construction cost of new construction of F kindergarten teachers as of 3,241,019,000 won, and the completion date of construction as of March 17, 2017.

(C) The construction amount was changed to KRW 3,053,030,740 upon completion settlement (hereinafter “the entire construction”).

Done on January 17, 2017, the following terms and conditions were written:

hereinafter referred to as "one contract"

2) Title of the contract: (tentative name of the construction project: Title of the contract for new construction of metal, windows, and glass project: KRW 147,180,00 (including payment terms of value-added tax: Payment terms of value-added tax: Trade name after filing an application for origin according to the schedule of field tolerance: D, representative director: Defendant B: Trade name, and representative director: Plaintiff

D. Around March 2017, a contract was additionally drawn up with the following content:

hereinafter referred to as "two contracts".

1. In the case of this case, the construction work under the two contracts shall be 'the construction work'.

2) The name of the contract (tentative division): (a) the name of the contract for new construction of a new kindergarten: metal, window, or glass construction contract amount: KRW 45,100,000 (including value-added tax: Payment condition: trade name after filing an application for flag in accordance with the schedule of field tolerance: D, representative director: Defendant B: Trade name, and representative director: the Plaintiff;

E. From January 2017 to March 2017, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work, and was paid KRW 75,358,570 as the construction cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 and 2, witness G of the first instance trial, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that ① concluded a contract with G with respect to the entire construction of this case with which the Defendant granted comprehensive power of representation for the entire construction of this case, and the Defendant, as a party to the contract for the instant construction, is obligated to pay the unpaid construction price to the Plaintiff.