1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Determination on the claim for construction price

A. On September 5, 2012, the Plaintiff, upon receiving a request from the Defendant for CCTV shooting and dredging construction from the sewage pipes at the construction site of the Yang-gu Military Cascian, completed the construction upon receiving an order from the Defendant to submit a quotation to the Defendant Company for construction, and on the premise that the construction contract was concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount stated in the purport of the claim as the construction cost.

B. However, according to the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 2, the Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of an amount equivalent to KRW 3,608,000 on September 18, 2012 as the person to whom Nonparty Sejong Cultural Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Sang Cultural Construction”) was supplied. According to the above facts of recognition, it is reasonable to deem that the Plaintiff was awarded a contract for construction works from Sejong Cultural Construction, and it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff was awarded a contract for construction works from the Defendant even if examining the remainder of the Plaintiff’s submission, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for construction payment against the Defendant is without merit.

2. Determination on a request for direct payment of the subcontract price

A. (1) On August 25, 2011, the Defendant: (a) determined and subcontracted the construction period of “civil engineering works among the military infrastructure projects (BTL) in the area of the military base facilities in the Seocheon-gu, Seocheon-gu, 201 to September 9, 2012; (b) the contract amount of KRW 560,000,000 (including value-added tax) respectively.

However, on November 201, the contract amount was changed to KRW 542,55,00 (including value-added tax) by agreement with the defendant around 201.

(2) On September 2012, the Sejong Cultural Construction re-subcontracted the construction cost of the said construction to the Plaintiff at KRW 3,608,000 during the said construction work, by setting the amount of construction cost for the CCTV survey, the sewage pipe testing, and the dredging of inhaled. The Plaintiff completed the said construction work around that time.

(3) On August 25, 201, the Defendant and the Sejong Cultural Construction Act as above.