Daejeon High Court 2009Nu1714 ( November 19, 2009)

Cho High 208 Before 1922 (Law No. 26, 2008)

It is reasonable to see that the actual contractor of a construction project is a nominal contractor.

It is reasonable to view that the other party to the transaction knew that the actual contractor is a nominal contractor in view of the relationship between the Plaintiff and the fact that he/she provided construction services after paying a comprehensive construction business license fee.

The contents of the decision shall be the same as attached.

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The instant records, the lower judgment, and the grounds of appeal (to the extent of supplement in case of any statement in the grounds of appeal filed after the lapse of the period for supplemental appellate brief) were examined. However, the allegation in the grounds of appeal by the appellant is deemed not to include the grounds provided for in each subparagraph of Article 4(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and thus, the appeal is dismissed in accordance with Article 5 of the same Act.