1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The assertion and judgment

A. Considering the reasoning of the judgment on the cause of the claim as stated in the evidence Nos. 4 and 5 and the testimony of the witness C of the first instance trial in addition to the purport of the entire pleadings, the Defendant entered into a housing construction contract with the Undo comprehensive construction company in intent to newly build multi-household housing on one parcel of land, including Guro-gu Seoul, Seoul, on September 4, 2012, and entered into a housing construction contract with the aforementioned construction site around September 20, 2012. The Plaintiff was performing civil engineering works around September 20, 2012, and the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff KRW 3.5 million to the Plaintiff. According to the above facts, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the agreed amount of KRW 3.5 million and the damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, which is the day following the delivery of the original copy of the payment order of this case sought by the Plaintiff.

B. As to the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant entered into a contract for construction with the Undo Comprehensive Construction, and the Plaintiff was a person who received sewage from the Undo Comprehensive Construction, and thus, he cannot claim a direct payment of the construction cost against the Defendant for the Undo Comprehensive Construction, apart from the fact that the Plaintiff is entitled to claim a payment of the construction cost for the Undo Comprehensive Construction. In addition, he is dissatisfied with the purport that the construction cost payable to the Undo Comprehensive Construction does not remain as it has been paid in full. As recognized earlier, as long as the Defendant agreed to pay the Plaintiff’s civil construction cost to the Plaintiff, the Defendant is the subcontractor of the Undo Comprehensive Construction, regardless of whether the Plaintiff was the subcontractor of the Undo Comprehensive Construction, and whether the Defendant paid the construction cost for the aforementioned civil construction cost for the Undo Comprehensive Construction, as long as the Plaintiff did not receive the payment from the Undo Comprehensive Construction.