1. The following part of the claim for deposit equivalent to the credit sales loan in the second or fifth credit sales loan in the judgment of the court of first instance:

1. In the instant case where the Plaintiff, subject to the adjudication of this court after remand, filed against the Defendant the “Deposit equivalent to the security loan on credit sales claims between 2 and 5 and the “Deposit equivalent to the 6th progress payment,” the first instance court rejected the above claims, and appealed as to the part against which both parties lost. The first instance court dismissed the Plaintiff’s appeal on the grounds that: (a) the Plaintiff and C agreed to receive progress payment in the form of security loan on credit sales claims after about one month from the date of the Plaintiff’s claim; and (b) the judgment prior to the remand was concluded with respect to the above claims (i) the agreement between the Plaintiff and C to receive progress payment in the form of security loan on credit sales claims after about one month from the date of the Plaintiff’s claim; (b) the due date of each loan shall be deemed the due date, and thus, the Defendant’s appeal shall be accepted and dismissed on the ground that the said date

As to the plaintiff's appeal, the judgment of remanding the plaintiff's appeal was accepted and reversed by the plaintiff's appeal as to the above part of the claim. The plaintiff's remaining appeal as to the above part of claim ② was dismissed.

Therefore, the subject of the judgment of this court after remand is limited to the claim of ‘1 to ‘the deposit equivalent to the credit security loan of credit sales claims' which is reversed and remanded, and the remaining ‘the claim' is separately determined.

2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as stated in the part of “1. Basic Facts” from No. 2, No. 11 to No. 5, No. 9 of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

An abbreviationd name established in the judgment of the first instance is also used below the same.

3. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The plaintiff completed the second or fifth construction before the execution date of the contract under the guarantee agreement of this case.