1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as follows. Thus, it is citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In full view of the following facts and circumstances, even if the Plaintiff, as alleged by the Plaintiff, invested the actual construction cost of KRW 145,241,149 in the instant construction project, and the Plaintiff may claim against the Defendant the amount equivalent to KRW 171,422,246 in total, including industrial accident insurance premiums, general management expenses, and profits therefrom, the amount of KRW 171,42,246 in total, may be claimed against the Defendant. However, in full view of the facts and circumstances revealed by the respective descriptions of KRW 4 and KRW 9, and the testimony and arguments of the witness C of the first instance trial, the Plaintiff may be recognized as having received KRW 173 million in total from the Defendant as the construction cost, and thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion cannot be accepted.

The Defendant deposited the construction cost several times with the account in the name of C’s wife, the Plaintiff Company’s site director, and the amount deposited as of April 24, 2017 is excluded from the payment of the construction cost to the Plaintiff. The amount is consistent with the amount of stone construction cost directly executed by C regardless of the Plaintiff.

B. In light of the fact that from April 17, 2017, before the Plaintiff’s discontinuance of construction work, the Defendant deposited into D’s account in the name of D, C is deemed to have been delegated by the Plaintiff with the authority to receive and execute the materials cost, personnel expenses, etc. related to construction work, and received payment from the Defendant.

C. The Plaintiff issued a tax invoice of KRW 173 million on July 27, 2017, which was after the Defendant deposited a total of KRW 173 million in the name of the Plaintiff or D, etc. from February 20, 2017 to June 29, 2017, in the name of the Plaintiff or D, and received value-added tax of KRW 173 million from the Defendant on July 31, 2017.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff.