1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 25, 2017, the Defendant contracted Daehan located within the Gunpo-si C (hereinafter “instant warehouse installation works”) from the Si of Mapo-si and subcontracted the said installation works to the Plaintiff on July 25, 2017, setting the construction cost of KRW 162,80,000 (including additional taxes) and the construction period from August 1, 2017 to January 21, 2018.

The plaintiff completed the above construction work within the agreed completion period.

B. On May 23, 2018, the Defendant was awarded a contract for a construction project for improving the F pedestrian environment in Suwon-si (hereinafter “instant pedestrian environment improvement project”) with the construction cost of KRW 184,49,630 (including surtax) and the construction period from May 23, 2018 to August 20, 2018.

Then, the term of construction work is the same year.

8. The period has been changed to 30.30. The same year thereafter.

9.5. It was changed to 9.5.

C. After the Defendant was awarded a contract for the foregoing construction work for the improvement of the pedestrian environment, the Plaintiff awarded a subcontract with the construction cost of KRW 139,000,000 (Additional Tax Table) for the said construction work on June 2018.

(hereinafter “instant subcontract”). D.

While performing construction works for improving the pedestrian environment, the Plaintiff suspended such construction works around August 22, 2018.

In spite of the Defendant’s request to return to construction, the Plaintiff did not proceed with the construction interrupted. On August 27, 2018, the Defendant notified the Plaintiff of the cancellation of the instant subcontract on the ground that the Plaintiff did not proceed with the construction despite the Plaintiff’s request for the resumption of construction and on-site adjustment with the content certification.

After that, the defendant directly completed the above construction work.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4, evidence Nos. 6-2, 7-7-1, 2, 8, 10-5, 17, 19, 20, and the purport of the oral argument

2. Summary of parties' arguments;

A. Although Plaintiff completed construction by subcontracting the instant construction work by the Defendant around July 2017, the Plaintiff was not paid KRW 4,883,920 of the construction cost, and thus, paid the unpaid amount.