The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A. Article 13(8) of the former Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act (amended by Act No. 11842, May 28, 2013; hereinafter “subcontract”) provides that “where the prime contractor pays the subcontract consideration after the lapse of 60 days from the date on which the object, etc. of the subcontract consideration was received, interest shall be paid according to the interest rate determined and publicly notified by the Fair Trade Commission in consideration of economic conditions, such as the overdue interest rate applied by banks under the Banking Act within 40/100 per annum.” Article 25(1) of the Subcontract Act provides that “The Fair Trade Commission may recommend or order the prime contractor who has violated Article 13, etc. to pay the subcontract consideration, to discontinue the act of violation, to prevent further recurrence, and to take other necessary corrective measures.”

B. Comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, the lower court: (a) concluded a subcontract on January 5, 2012 with respect to the contract amount of the freight elevator installation works (hereinafter “instant construction works”) with respect to the central elevator (hereinafter “central elevator”) which is the principal contractor under the Subcontract Act, the subcontractor; (b) on January 5, 2012, with respect to the first new construction works at the Nacuart, Korea Co., Ltd., Ltd., Ltd., the first construction works; (c) the construction period of which is from January 5, 2012 to February 29, 2012; (d) the central elevator completed the instant construction works on March 27, 2012; and (e) delivered the elevator to the Plaintiff or the ordering person; and (e) filed a civil lawsuit against the Plaintiff seeking payment of unpaid subcontract price against the Plaintiff; and (e) concluded a provisional execution judgment with respect to the Plaintiff on August 29, 2012, both the Plaintiff and the Central Elevator 10.