1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. As to this part of the basic facts, the court's reasoning is the same as the part of "1. Facts recognized" among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. The plaintiff and defendant's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the sum of the construction cost of KRW 59.2 million and damages for delay for the following reasons. 2) The Plaintiff’s basic fact as ordered by the Nonparty Company.

Although the construction works described in the subsection (a) (hereinafter referred to as the “paragraph (a) construction works”) were subcontracted by H, the construction works could not be paid due to the default of H.

In this situation, the defendant is a defendant.

(b) the Corporation, the basic facts.

All of the construction works described in the subsection (b) (hereinafter referred to as “paragraph (b) works”) are taken over from H and the Plaintiff.

The obligation for the construction cost was fully accepted.

A. thereafter:

For the payment of the claim for the construction cost, the defendant will proceed to the plaintiff.

The plaintiff and the defendant demanded the preparation of the contract form with the content of the port construction, and the plaintiff and the defendant prepared each contract form stated in Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 5.

Then, the defendant will go against the plaintiff.

Since 400,000,000 won out of the construction cost, the remainder of 57,000,000 won has not been paid.

In accordance with an agreement under which the payment of the construction cost shall be made, the defendant shall be liable to pay it.

3) The Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded a contract for construction cost of KRW 24.2 million with respect to the construction work described in paragraph (c) (hereinafter “airline”) and completed the construction work by the Plaintiff. However, the Defendant paid only the construction cost of KRW 22 million, but did not pay the construction cost of KRW 2.2 million. The Defendant’s assertion 1) on the following grounds.

(b) the Commission;

(c) there is no obligation to pay the construction cost with respect to port works.

2(a)

B. As to port construction, the non-party company is a subcontractor with H's default.

(2) the construction cost of the Corporation.