All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 11, 2014, the Defendant entered into a contract with C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C”) under which the instant construction works were contracted for Kimhae-si E (hereinafter referred to as “instant construction works”).

B. On April 11, 2014, C entered into a project financing agreement with the F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”), and the Defendant participated in the instant loan agreement as “Conditional Assumption of Obligation” and agreed to jointly take over C’s loan obligations with respect to F in the event of certain causes, such as the Defendant’s nonperformance of the obligation to complete the responsibility by the agreed deadline.

C. As of July 30, 2014, the Plaintiff drafted a contract to accept a subcontract for soil works and structures among the instant construction works from the Defendant (hereinafter “instant subcontract”).

As of July 15, 2014, the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and C entered into a direct payment agreement as follows (hereinafter “instant direct payment agreement”) with respect to the construction cost that the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff according to the instant subcontract as of July 30, 2014. If the contract amount and the contract period of the prime contract and the subcontracting contract are modified, the agreement on the direct payment of the subcontract price is deemed to have agreed on the direct payment of the subcontract price according to the modified contract amount and the contract period, even if the separate agreement on the direct payment of the subcontract price is not entered into.

In the subcontract between subcontractors, sewage seems to be a clerical error in the subcontractor.

The ordering person shall agree between the ordering person, contractor and subcontractor to pay the subcontract price corresponding to the construction portion directly to the subcontractor pursuant to the provisions of Article 35 (2) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.

C, Defendant, and F, etc. are concurrently the Defendant under the loan agreement of this case on August 26, 2016.