1. The judgment of the first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff succeeding intervenor's claim is dismissed.

3...

1. Summary of the cause of the claim asserted by the plaintiff and the intervenor succeeding to the plaintiff

A. On November 23, 2012, the Defendant Company re-subcontracted the Plaintiff Company to the contract price of KRW 737 million (including value added tax) for the steel construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”) subcontracted by Nonparty A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”).

B. Around June 30, 2013, the Plaintiff Company completed the instant construction. The construction price that the Plaintiff Company had not received from the Defendant Company is KRW 95,152,213 (hereinafter “instant construction price claim”).

C. The Plaintiff’s succeeding intervenor was based on the executory exemplification of the payment order decision with executory power in the distribution expense case against the Plaintiff, Busan District Court Decision 2013J2439 and Busan District Court Decision 2013 Ma32424, which held against the Defendant, and was ordered to seize and collect the instant construction cost claim against the Defendant.

2. Determination

A. In light of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Defendant received a subcontract for the instant construction work from A and re-subcontracted it to the Plaintiff, as alleged by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

① Evidence No. 1 submitted by the Plaintiff as evidence that the Plaintiff entered into a sub-subcontract with the Defendant is not only a subcontract but also an on-site operation agreement, but also the Defendant’s seal is omitted.

② According to Article 3 of the above On-Site Operating Agreement, the Plaintiff, a subcontractor, rather than pays KRW 15 million to the Defendant, the subcontractor, and the contract amount is stated that it cannot be changed in any circumstances, such as increase or decrease due to design modification, and is different from the general sub-subcontract contract.