The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff is a company that runs the construction business, the aesthetic design construction business, etc., and the Defendant is a company that runs the interior construction business, the metal creative construction business, etc.

B. The Defendant, on April 10, 2018, has the construction period for metal and windows among the new construction works at D elementary schools between C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) and the contractor (hereinafter “C”), and the same year from April 10, 2018.

7. Until December 25, 200, construction price was KRW 412,038,00 (including value-added tax) and was awarded a subcontract (hereinafter “instant subcontract”).

C. On July 8, 2018, the Plaintiff completed the instant construction work, such as Chang Ho-ho dancing (hereinafter “instant construction”).

On July 9, 2018, the Plaintiff issued an electronic tax invoice on the total of KRW 11,000,000 (i.e., the value of supply 10,000,000,000) in terms of the cost of construction for creative housing as Defendant (=the value of KRW 10,000,000).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 6, Eul evidence 1, fact inquiry and reply to the Office of Education in the Gyeonggi-do, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract price of KRW 11,00,000 (including value-added tax) with respect to the instant construction work among the said new construction works orally from the Defendant, and completed the said construction work.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the above subcontract price of KRW 11,00,000 and damages for delay to the plaintiff.

B. On the premise that the Plaintiff was awarded a subcontract for the instant construction work by the Defendant, the key issue in the instant case was that the Defendant filed the instant claim against the Defendant. However, the Defendant asserted that C had paid the Defendant the title and metal construction among the said new construction works, and that C had paid the Plaintiff each contract for the instant construction works, and that C was merely the contractor in relation to C and subcontracted the instant construction works to the Plaintiff.