1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) corresponding to the following amount ordered to be paid:

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On May 26, 2017, the Defendant: (a) ordered L to perform the studio construction work on the land of the Geumcheon-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City M (hereinafter “instant construction work”); (b) the construction cost of KRW 98 million from May 31, 2017 to July 31, 2017; and (c) L subcontracted the part of the instant construction work during the instant construction work to the Plaintiff; (d) accordingly, the Plaintiff and the designated parties who are employed workers (hereinafter “Plaintiff, etc.”) were to perform the said studio construction work from July 2017 to September 2017.

B. When the construction of this case was delayed due to disputes arising from the unpaid issue of the construction payment of this case, the Plaintiff and L, around October 19, 2017, settled the unpaid construction payment between the Defendant’s agent C, and then the Plaintiff and L, upon deducting KRW 7 million from N Corporation and finishing the construction of this case, shall be paid KRW 20 million on condition that they would complete the construction of this case. The Plaintiff himself would not bring about any civil or criminal issues later, and hereinafter “Written Declaration”).

【Ground of recognition】 Facts without any dispute, Gap’s 1 to 5, Eul’s 1 and 2 (which include a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply)

each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff, etc., provided labor from July 21, 2017 to September 15, 2017, and completed the mold construction work. Therefore, the Defendant, the ordering person of the instant construction, as a contracting party, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff, etc. KRW 586 million as stated in the purport of the claim, as the construction cost and wage payable to the Plaintiff, etc.

As seen earlier, the Plaintiff et al. was awarded a subcontract for the part of the instant construction project from L, a contractor who is not the Defendant, and completed it, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise that the Plaintiff et al. directly concluded a construction contract with the Defendant who is the subcontractor.