1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) The Plaintiffs entered into a contract between the Plaintiffs and D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) on October 29, 2016.

) “Construction of a newly built multi-household with the size of the first and fourth floor above the ground in Seongbuk-gu Seoul E-Ground (hereinafter “instant construction”).”

(1) The contract amount was set at KRW 1.1 billion (including value-added tax), the construction period from October 2016 to April 2017, 2017, respectively, and the contract was awarded at KRW 0.1% (per day) of the liquidated damages rate (hereinafter “instant contract”).

(2) Since then, it was determined that there was no need to collect value-added tax as the Plaintiffs were tax-exempt business entities. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs and D agreed to reduce the contract amount to one billion won on April 20, 2017, and on April 27, 2017, a new contract form that reflects the reduced contract amount as above was formulated, and the construction period was extended by up to one month until May 30, 2017.

B. (1) On November 5, 2016, D entered into a subcontract between D and the Defendant, respectively, concluded a subcontract with the Defendant, setting the period of construction from November 15, 2016 to April 30, 2017, at KRW 750,000 of the contract price for the removal, construction, civil engineering, and electricity construction during the instant construction, as well as at KRW 0.1% of the liquidated damages rate (hereinafter referred to as “instant subcontract”).

(2) The construction cost was to pay KRW 300 million after the completion of the framework construction, KRW 250 million after the completion of the external finishing construction work outside glass, and KRW 200 million after the completion of the construction work.

C. 1) The Defendant’s direct payment agreement, etc. between the Plaintiff, D and the Defendant on the payment of the construction price was carried out according to the instant subcontract, and D did not pay the subcontract price properly, and the construction was suspended on April 2017. 2) Accordingly, the Plaintiff, D and the Defendant, on June 28, 2017, shall resume construction under the instant subcontract and complete the remaining construction by the Defendant, and the Plaintiffs shall pay the remainder of the subcontract price directly to the Defendant.