1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

The reasons why this court should explain this part of the facts are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance in addition to the dismissal of the following parts. Therefore, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

1. Following the second, third, third to seven parts of the judgment of the court of first instance, “B creation works” (hereinafter “instant construction works”) shall be added.

2. The second 8th th h h h h h h h and 9th h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h h

The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion and determination parties’ assertion is that the Plaintiff contracted the instant construction from the Jeonju City, and entered into an agreement with C to participate in construction with regard to outstanding cancer and bridge construction among them. C entered into a material lease agreement with the Defendant for the execution of the said construction, and the Plaintiff did not have entered into a material lease agreement with the Defendant.

Therefore, there is no obligation of the Plaintiff to pay the materials rent to the Defendant. Therefore, the compulsory execution based on the payment order of the court No. 2014j454 in the Jeonju District Court is denied.

The defendant's assertion that the defendant is not C is the party to a material lease contract with the plaintiff who is not C, and the plaintiff is obligated to pay the material rent to the defendant.

Judgment

In full view of the following circumstances, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 (a lease contract: a statement of transaction, and the plaintiff's seal imprint, are presumed to be the authenticity of the whole document due to no dispute over the plaintiff's seal imprint. The plaintiff's signature following the plaintiff's on-site director's signature is acknowledged to be based on the official seal of the field director's office used by E, but there is no evidence to prove that the third party affixed the above official seal at his own discretion, but there is no evidence to prove that the third party affixed the above official seal at his own discretion), Eul evidence Nos. 4 and 5, and the whole purport