1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Basic Facts

On June 10, 2014, the Defendant awarded a contract to Nonparty D for a new construction of Gyeong-gun C ground housing (hereinafter “instant construction”) at the request of Do from June 2014 to September 2014. The Plaintiff supplied necessary construction materials to Nonparty D at the request of Do.

【Ground of Recognition” 1 , the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 45,430,00 for the material cost supplied by the Plaintiff on the ground that the Defendant agreed to pay the material cost directly to the Plaintiff, as well as damages for delay in the entire purport of testimony and arguments by witnesses D and E of the first instance trial witness E, and it is deemed that there was an agreement between the Plaintiff, D and Defendant 3 on the direct payment of the material cost.

In light of the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the respective descriptions of Eul 2, 4, 8, and 9 (including the number of branches), the witness D, and witness E of the court of first instance, as well as the overall purport of each of the testimony and arguments, it is insufficient to deem that some of the testimonys of Gap 1 and 2, the witness D of the court of first instance, and witness E of the court of first instance have reached an agreement on the direct payment of the price of the material between the plaintiff, defendant 3, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

① From June 2014 to September 28, 2014, D requested the Defendant to pay back to the supplier the price of the instant construction directly, such as ready-mixeds, steel bars, steel bars, reinforcement floor, or labor cost. The Defendant, upon the said request, received a written consent from D, etc. for a direct payment of the price of the goods and directly paid the said amount to the supplier.

On the other hand, even though the Plaintiff supplied other construction materials than the above ready-mixeds, the Plaintiff did not receive some of the price from the Defendant.

Rather, the Defendant paid D KRW 10,000,000 on July 21, 2014 as material price, and KRW 19,060,00 on September 19, 2014, respectively.

(2) The witness D and the witness E of the first instance court shall be a material price for the plaintiff in the first instance and in this court.