1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) On September 22, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) the construction of the facility for the elderly and children (hereinafter “instant construction”) from the Defendant on the following grounds:

(2) Among the construction works, the Plaintiff supplied sewage to KRW 37,80,000 (excluding value-added tax) plus KRW 16,62 million. Each construction work contract (i.e., evidence 2-1 and 2-2) is written by the Defendant C with the Defendant’s employee seal affixed to the form written by the Plaintiff. (ii) Although the Plaintiff completed the construction work, the Defendant paid only KRW 16,50,000 on November 3, 2014 and KRW 16,50,000 on April 7, 200 of the same year, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the unpaid construction price of KRW 22,80,000 and value-added tax on the tax invoice issued by the Defendant.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion 1) The Defendant did not subcontract part of the instant construction to the Plaintiff. The Defendant subcontracted the entire construction work to D and performed the construction work, and there is no reason to re-subcontract part of them to the Plaintiff. In addition, each construction work contract submitted by the Plaintiff is not the Defendant’s form, but the Defendant did not affix the seals to each of the above contracts. 2) The Defendant paid 35 million won to D on December 31, 2014 and had D execute unpaid material, mid-term, labor costs, etc., and D paid the amount corresponding thereto to the Plaintiff. Accordingly, the Plaintiff should be paid the unpaid construction cost from D.

2. We examine whether the Plaintiff was directly subcontracted part of the instant construction works from the Defendant.

The fact that the seal affixed to each construction work contract (No. 2-1 and 2-2) is the defendant's employee does not conflict between the parties, but even according to the plaintiff's assertion, the above construction work contract was brought to C, and it is not known that anyone affixed the defendant's employee seal to each of the above construction work contracts.