1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant and PPS Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “PS Construction”) were jointly awarded a contract for the construction of an urban development project complex in the East Tri District by the Busan Urban Corporation, the ordering person.

B. On April 11, 2014, Es.S. Construction concluded a subcontract for T.P production and storage works (hereinafter “instant subcontract”) during the said construction with the Plaintiff as well as the construction cost of KRW 345,180,000.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1

2. The plaintiff's assertion SP construction is the representative of the joint contractor with the defendant, and the contract of this case was concluded with the plaintiff, and the defendant is jointly and severally liable to pay the subcontract price to the plaintiff.

The Defendant’s liability for the payment of the subcontract price to the Plaintiff is supported by the fact that, on April 11, 2014, at the time that the Plaintiff entered into the instant subcontract with Es.S. construction, the Defendant prepared a written consent as a joint contractor, and on April 18, 2014, the Busan Urban Corporation, the ordering person, should pay the subcontract price directly, as well as Es.S. construction, and the Defendant signed and sealed as the contractor, and on June 20, 2014, the Defendant promised to pay on behalf of the Plaintiff KRW 100,000,000.

3. In the following respect, it is difficult to view that the Defendant is liable to pay the construction cost under the instant subcontract to the Plaintiff solely on the basis of the Plaintiff’s assertion, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

The contract of the subcontracted construction of this case, and the other party who the Plaintiff entered into the subcontract is only SP construction, and the defendant is not a party to the contract.

In addition, there is no evidence that Es. Es. Construction concluded the instant subcontract as the Defendant’s representative. According to the written evidence Nos. 2 and 8, the Defendant is guilty.