1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company that supplies the construction company with materials, such as wood and Gohap, and the Defendant is a company that operates reinforced concrete construction business.

B. Around January 2017, the Defendant: (a) subcontracted the instant construction of reinforced concrete (hereinafter “instant construction”) among the construction of D University E Campus dormitories by C Co., Ltd. at approximately KRW 2.1 billion; (b) around that time, the Defendant took charge of the supply of materials, management of human resources, and payment of wages to F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”); and (c) around January 2017, G, the actual representative of F, began to undertake the instant construction while managing the H and 30-40 human resources from around January 2017.

C. The Plaintiff from March 11, 2017 to the same year

4. From May 27, 2017, G supplied materials, including wood (including value-added tax) equivalent to KRW 63,756,550 (hereinafter “materials for March 3, 2017”) to the instant construction site. Meanwhile, from around April 27, 2017, G discontinued work related to the instant construction project, and the Defendant was in charge of H from that time. E. The Plaintiff supplied materials, including wood (including value-added tax) equivalent to KRW 18,99,750 (including value-added tax) for the sixth day of the same month as of May 3, 2017 at the instant construction site (hereinafter “materials for May 2017”).

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 to 5, Gap evidence 7, Gap evidence 17 to 25, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to a claim for materials on March and April 2017

A. As to a direct claim against the Defendant for the price of goods, the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 63,756,550 to the Plaintiff the price of the goods, on the premise that the Plaintiff directly supplied the materials for March, 2017 to the Defendant. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the sales contract for the said materials was established between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the sole basis of the testimony of the witness G in the first instance trial and the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff.