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.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 5, 2015, the Plaintiff received a request from C to perform the construction work for the development and utilization of groundwater (hereinafter “instant construction work”) from the Yangsan City D (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by the Defendant, and performed the construction work after reporting the development and utilization of groundwater in the name of the Defendant on the same day, and received confirmation of completion from Yangsan-si around October 2015.

B. On March 3, 2016, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of claim for construction cost of KRW 9 million on the premise that the instant construction was carried out through C (name of the Defendant’s agent). Accordingly, on March 8, 2016, the Defendant sent a reply to the effect that the Plaintiff did not enter into a contract related to the instant construction project with the Plaintiff, and that the reply was sent to the Plaintiff around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 3 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The plaintiff's assertion is the owner of the land of this case and the contractor of the construction of this case who is a party to the contract between the plaintiff and the plaintiff, and thus, the plaintiff is obligated to pay the unpaid construction cost of KRW 9 million and the delay damages.

B. On April 2015, the Defendant asserted that the construction of a new factory and a stable construction on the ground of the instant land, including the instant construction work, were awarded a contract to C with the construction cost of KRW 100 million, and there is no contractual relationship with the Plaintiff.

3. As to whether the contract for the instant construction project was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the health team, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to accept such contract, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. On the other hand, the following circumstances, which can be seen by comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and arguments in subparagraphs 1 and 2 as well as the overall purport of the pleadings, are as follows.