1. The plaintiff's appeal is all 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.

The Plaintiff’s assertion as to the claim against Defendant B was awarded a contract for the new construction of the building D located in Ansan-si, and the Plaintiff completed the construction on or around November 2017. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 17,613,00,00, plus KRW 54,067,000 for the Plaintiff who was paid reimbursement in KRW 62,880,000, and KRW 3.8,813,000 for the Plaintiff, plus KRW 5,00,000 for the repair cost of the building D located in Ansan-si, and KRW 17,613,00,00 for the Plaintiff.

① As to the construction cost totaling KRW 62,880,00, the Defendant agreed to KRW 31.2 million for labor cost for steel processing assembly (i.e., KRW 130 x 2 x 120,000 won), the materials cost and miscellaneous materials cost (i.e., KRW 120 x 2 x 70,000 won, and KRW 16.8 million for the construction cost (i.e., KRW 120 x 2 x 340,000). The Defendant asserted that the construction cost has been paid in excess of the construction cost, etc. under the circumstances that the Plaintiff did not complete.

The plaintiff asserts that the plaintiff entered into a subcontract separately with the non-party E as to the part of the above pro rata personnel expenses. Therefore, the propriety of the claim should be examined only for the part of the construction claimed by the plaintiff as the cause of the claim.

Personnel expenses for the steel processing and assembly of the building of this case: 31,440,00 won (i.e., 131 square meters x 2 Dong x 120,000 won) (i.e., 131 square meters x 2 Dong x 120,000 won),

The above defendant introduced the plaintiff, "I would make payment at the time of the settlement of construction cost later if the plaintiff made a preferential payment to the plaintiff," and because the plaintiff paid the above cream expenses on behalf of the above defendant, the above defendant did so.