1. The part against Defendant B among the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 29,608,000.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who is engaged in waterproof construction, etc. in the trade name of D, Defendant B is a person who conducts interior decoration business, etc. in the trade name of Defendant B, and Defendant C is a person who worked as a director in Party E.

B. Around 2015, F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) was awarded a contract for G construction (hereinafter “instant construction”) from the United States Armed Forces.

C. On June 30, 2016, the Plaintiff issued an electronic tax invoice of KRW 36,608,000 (hereinafter “instant tax invoice”) in total of KRW 33,280,000, tax amount of KRW 328,000, the Plaintiff’s supplier, and the recipient, as Defendant B (E).

On September 15, 2016, Defendant C issued to the Plaintiff a certificate of confirmation as follows (hereinafter “instant certificate”).

A certificate of confirmation number: H Corporation name: 29,608,00 won: Name of Enterprise: D (Representative A) the amount of which is not paid to the Corporation, and in the event of failure to pay in E, a SUB enterprise of the F Company, the FIME company, the PRE company, shall be able to receive directly, and E shall provide all cooperation.

September 15, 2016 seems to be a clerical error in September 15, 2017.

Mutual Name E: Representative: B B (Reasons for Recognition) / D / Non-satisfy, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff B (E) was awarded a subcontract for the instant construction from F. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant construction works were performed by F. The Plaintiff, during the instant construction works, shall be deemed to have been performed during the process of repair of walls and replacement of filters, etc. (hereinafter “instant Epoping construction”).

) Defendant B (E) performed the construction by re-subcontracting from Defendant B (E), and issued the instant tax invoice (36,608,000 won) to Defendant B (E). The Plaintiff received KRW 7,00,000, out of the construction cost of the instant case from K, who is a field manager of E, but did not receive the construction cost of KRW 29,608,000 (=36,608,000) - 7,000,000.

Defendant C and E were in partnership with Defendant C.

Therefore, it is true.