1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. On November 1, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction of D equipment between B and Cheongju Factory.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 1, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with B as of November 1, 2016 (hereinafter “B”) for the construction of D equipment in the Plaintiff’s factory (hereinafter “instant equipment”; KRW 2.559 million for the construction cost (i.e., value-added tax of KRW 2.69 billion for value-added tax of KRW 2.69 million); and (ii) for the construction period of March 31, 2017, upon entering into the contract with B (hereinafter “instant construction contract”); (iii) KRW 87 million for the down payment of KRW 30 million for the construction cost; (iv) KRW 1.9 billion for the remainder of the construction cost after the process of manufacturing the equipment; and (v) KRW 2.58 billion for each of the intermediate payment of KRW 300 million for the construction cost; and (v) KRW 1.58 billion for each of the intermediate payment of KRW 1.5 billion for 200 million for each of the construction cost at the B’s plant.

B. According to the instant construction contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 887,77 million in cash on November 2, 2016, according to the instant construction contract, and paid KRW 887,77 million in bills on February 23, 2017.

C. B was declared bankrupt by the Seoul Rehabilitation Court on May 1, 2017 (2017Hahap10054), and the Defendant was appointed as the bankruptcy trustee B.

On June 7, 2017, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a certificate to the effect that the instant construction contract, which was an executory bilateral contract, would be rescinded pursuant to Article 335(1) of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “ Debtor Rehabilitation Act”), and that the said certificate reached the Plaintiff around that time.

E. Meanwhile, the Defendant Intervenor is the employee retired from B.

B does not currently retain the construction cost received from the Plaintiff by using all the wages and retirement allowances of the Defendant Intervenor, who is an employee.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 8, 9, 37, 38, Eul evidence No. 1, 2, and Eul.