청구이의
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.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the facts is as stated in the part concerning “1. Basic Facts” from No. 6 to No. 3 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as follows, except for the partial completion as follows, the part of “2... judgment” from the last 3rd to 7th 8 of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the part pertaining to “2... judgment.” Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article
[Supplementary Use] On the third side of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "fair evidence" in the last letter of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be applied to "notarial deed".
According to the fifth judgment of the court of first instance, the 4th "members" shall be appointed as "employee".
Part 6 of the judgment of the first instance court (C) is subject to the judgment of the court of first instance on the assertion that the construction failure is not consistent with the substantive relationship due to the failure to complete construction works, etc.).
Part 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance stated in Part 11 as follows, "The execution based on the Notarial Deed of this case shall not be permitted, since there are parts that have not been completed during the construction of this case."
As stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff's execution based on the No. 16 of the No. 16 of the judgment of the court of first instance stating that since the construction cost presented by the defendant is unfairly excessive compared to the actual construction cost, the amount on the No. notarial deed of this case is not reflected in the construction cost paid by the defendant or its subcontractor prior to the preparation of the No. notarial deed of this case, since the amount on the No. notarial deed of this case does not coincide with the actual construction cost, compulsory execution based on the No. 16 of the No. 16 of the No. 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit.
1. As seen earlier.