1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On September 11, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction work with the Defendant with the cost of construction 5,00,000 won (including value-added tax; hereinafter the same shall apply) for the construction work of installing a bank room in the Nam-gu Seoul District D Hospital (hereinafter “instant construction work”), and completed the instant construction work, and completed the construction work in addition, the construction work of installation of a galps and galps in an amount equivalent to KRW 7,700,000 in an amount of KRW 4,54,000. The Defendant paid KRW 13,200,000 out of the said price through E and did not pay the remainder of KRW 54,054,000,000, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the construction cost of construction 54,054,000 and damages for delay.

2. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that a contract for construction works as alleged by the Plaintiff was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s above assertion based on the premise that such contract for construction works was concluded is without merit without further review

Rather, the following facts and circumstances revealed by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments in Gap evidence 3 through 5 and Eul evidence 1 through 7 (including Serial number), witness F, and witness testimony of each part of E, the defendant, around September 1, 2017, entered into a contract for construction with E, setting the construction amount of one billion won and the construction period from September 1, 2017 to November 5, 2017; the scope of the above construction; the plaintiff appears to have prepared a subcontract for the construction project of this case with E around September 2017; the plaintiff paid the plaintiff KRW 5,500 as the price for the construction project of this case; and the plaintiff issued the tax invoice to E on the same date; and the plaintiff issued the tax invoice to E.