1. The Defendant’s KRW 30,540,00 and the Plaintiff’s KRW 15% per annum from March 30, 2019 to May 31, 2019.

1. The gist of the parties’ assertion is that the Plaintiff leased one string at the construction site of the New Construction site of the Seocho-si Cmerdi Complex at the Defendant’s request and completed the installation of the H beamline and the construction work (hereinafter “instant construction”). As such, the Plaintiff seeks payment for the construction cost to the Defendant.

In this regard, the defendant did not have concluded a contract for construction with the plaintiff, and since the contract was subcontracted to the D company for construction of this case and the settlement was completed, the plaintiff's claim cannot be accepted.

2. Determination

A. The construction site manager of the relevant legal doctrine is a person who generally takes charge of the work related to the construction work at a specific construction site, and barring special circumstances, he/she is an employee delegated with the specific type of business or specific matters under Article 15 of the Commercial Act, and has only a partial comprehensive power of attorney. The scope of the work is all acts related to the conclusion of a subcontract agreement and the payment of the construction cost thereof, and the payment of the rent thereof, in addition to the materials and labor management related to the construction work, and the construction site manager is an act related to the conclusion of the relevant subcontract contract and the payment of the construction cost thereof, and even if any small scale, the business activity, such as the execution of a new contracting activity that is irrelevant

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 94Da20884, Sept. 30, 1994; 201Da79838, Feb. 28, 2013). (B)

Judgment

The Defendant received a contract from the owner of the building for the construction of the above main complex, and the Plaintiff received a subcontract for the construction of this case from E, the head of the Defendant’s site office, and accordingly, the Plaintiff incurred construction cost equivalent to KRW 45,540,00 as the Plaintiff completed the construction from July 15, 2018 to August 4, 2018, and the Plaintiff issued the electronic tax invoice for the construction cost of this case twice at the request of the Defendant.