1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The assertion;

A. The Plaintiff supplied goods from August 1, 2014 to November 20, 2014 at the site of the Defendant’s door-to-door A New Construction Corporation and Sung-gun B New Construction Corporation. The price for the goods was KRW 45,194,589, and the Defendant did not pay KRW 20,678,99 among them.

B. The Defendant entered into an agreement with Nonparty C Construction to supply construction materials, and the said C Construction entered into a contract to supply construction materials with the Plaintiff. Around September 2014, the Defendant and the said C Construction entered into a direct payment agreement with the Plaintiff, and the Defendant consented to the direct payment agreement by issuing a tax invoice to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant asserts that he is obliged to pay the price of the goods to the plaintiff pursuant to Article 14 (1) 2 of the Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act.

2. We examine whether there was a direct payment agreement between the Plaintiff and the said C Construction and the Defendant, since the Plaintiff recognized the fact that the said C Construction and the Defendant entered into a goods supply contract.

According to the statement 1, 2, etc. of the evidence No. 9-2, it is insufficient to recognize that the Defendant paid part of the price for the goods to the Plaintiff within the extent of the completed height of the above C Construction in order to facilitate the construction work at the construction site. However, it is insufficient to recognize that there was a direct payment agreement between three parties. There is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Rather, according to the judgment on evidence No. 6,7,8,9,10,11, the subcontractors who concluded the above CConstruction and the above CConstruction contract or the construction materials supply contract have filed a lawsuit against the Defendant, but have lost all of them.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim cannot be accepted.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.