The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. Basic facts

A. On May 2, 2018, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to subcontract the supply and construction of glass among D new construction works that the Plaintiff was contracted by C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant contract”).

Specific details are as follows:

Delivery Period: Payment of the price of KRW 308,00,00 (including value-added tax) from May 15, 2018 to July 31, 2018: The payment of the price of KRW 308,00,000 (including value-added tax): By the end of each month, the payment in direct and direct payment is made in C after consent to the payment in cash with C on the 45th day after the settlement of each month. The delayed compensation rate: Civil and criminal liability arising from the delay in execution (one day)

B. On September 17, 2018, the Defendant filed an application against the Plaintiff for a payment order against the Plaintiff under the Jeonju District Court Kim Jong-si Court 2018 tea194, on the ground that the Plaintiff was not paid the construction cost of the instant contract, and the said application became final and conclusive as it did not raise any objection.

On October 19, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit of objection against the payment order by asserting that “C, the Plaintiff, and the Defendant agreed to pay the construction price directly to the Defendant, the subcontractor, at the time of the instant contract,” and that “The Plaintiff’s obligation to pay the construction price to the Defendant was extinguished,” but on the ground that it is difficult to deem that C, on July 18, 2019, entered into a direct payment agreement with the Defendant, the judgment dismissing the Plaintiff’s claim. The said judgment became final and conclusive due to the Plaintiff’s failure to file an appeal.

(hereinafter referred to as “the final and conclusive judgment of this case”). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 13, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 9 (including branch numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the first instance court sought payment of the liquidated damages based on the violation of the instant contract, and the payment of the liquidated damages based on the violation of the instant contract concluded with the Defendant on the same day, but the third place from the trial.