1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts - around May 1, 2018, the Defendant awarded a contract to C for the repair work of detached houses E located in the old-si city owned by oneself (hereinafter “instant house”).

- around May 10, 2018, C subcontracted the above construction to the Plaintiff as it is.

- Around June 22, 2018, the Plaintiff completed the above construction work.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 evidence, Eul 1 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that C was the owner of the instant house, but later, the Plaintiff was the Defendant.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff requested that the Defendant “if the construction cost is paid to C, the payment shall be made in the presence of the Plaintiff,” and the Defendant promised to do so.

Nevertheless, the defendant issued the above promise and paid the construction price to C without the presence of the plaintiff.

Therefore, the defendant is jointly and severally liable with C to pay 30,028,000 won for the construction price that the plaintiff has not received.

B. The Defendant’s assertion stated that the Defendant received the aforementioned request from the Plaintiff for payment.

However, since the defendant entered into a contract for construction with C only, there is no reason to comply with the above request of the plaintiff, and there is no fact that the defendant actually promised to pay in the presence.

Therefore, there is no reason for the defendant to pay the construction cost that the plaintiff did not receive from C.

C. It is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Defendant, as alleged by the Plaintiff, made a direct payment of the construction cost to the Plaintiff, or promised to pay C at least in the presence of the Plaintiff. There is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Rather, when both the Plaintiff and the Defendant have filed a criminal complaint against C in fraud and the investigative agency make a statement in the capacity of the complainant, the Plaintiff knows that the Defendant is the owner of the house.