1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the judgment of the first instance except for adding the following judgments, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiff asserts that even in the trial, as a contracting party to the second electrical construction, F was decided to receive the construction price from the defendant as a replacement, the defendant is liable for nonperformance because he did not pay F the second electrical construction price, and since the plaintiff suffered losses due to the completion of settlement between the defendant and F, the defendant should pay the amount equivalent to the second electrical construction price as compensation for unjust enrichment return or tort.

However, unlike the first electrical construction, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the plaintiff directly entered into a contract with the defendant as a contracting party in the second electrical construction, unlike the evidence submitted by the court of first instance and the witness J of the trial, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Even if the settlement between the defendant and the F is completed, it is difficult to view that the F's obligation to pay the construction price is not affected by the F's insolvency, and even if it is selected as a de facto non-performance assertion due to F's insolvency, there is no assertion or proof as to the requirements, and the plaintiff's assertion does

3. The decision of the first instance court is justifiable, and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.