1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 13,260,158 against the Plaintiff and its related thereto, from March 20, 2014 to January 13, 2016.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an individual entrepreneur (trade name: B) who engages in a construction mid-term rental and contracting business, and the Defendant is a corporation established for the purpose of soil and sand transportation business, etc.

B. The Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant with the following content.

The defendant shall conclude a soil and sand transport contract with the contractor at the construction site, and arrange the plaintiff for the soil and sand transport business contracted to him.

The plaintiff shall maintain the vehicle only at the business designated by the defendant while transporting soil and sand at the construction site arranged by the defendant.

When the defendant receives a transport charge from a contractor, he/she shall pay the plaintiff after deducting the defendant's brokerage fee (5%), the vehicle maintenance fee, and the oil payment.

C. The Plaintiff, as a broker of the Defendant, transported sand at the site development site using two dump trucks from April 2013 to June 2013.

(hereinafter) The Plaintiff’s act of transporting the above earth and sand (hereinafter “this case’s soil and sand transport”). [Grounds for recognition: the fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion lies in KRW 67,870,640. The Plaintiff’s transport charges of KRW 21,389,150 for the Plaintiff’s main oil, KRW 3,960,00 for the maintenance of the vehicle, KRW 20,00 for the transport charges of KRW 20,068,00 for the Plaintiff’s direct payment from the contractor, and KRW 6,00,00 for the transport charges of KRW 16,453,490 for the Defendant’s direct payment (total transport charges of KRW 67,870,640 for the transport charges of KRW 21,389,150 for the main oil - KRW 3,960,00 for the automobile maintenance charges of KRW 20,00 for the transport charges of KRW 6,00 for the transport charges already received from the contractor).

Therefore, the defendant should pay to the plaintiff the above 16,453,490 won and damages for delay.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion 1) The part disputing the Defendant’s payment of the transport charges of KRW 67,870,640, which the Plaintiff received directly from the contractor ( KRW 21,389,150,000, the transport charges of KRW 20,068,000, which the Plaintiff received directly from the contractor) is the part that the Defendant had already paid 6,00,000.