The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

In a case where there is a different opinion on the interpretation of a contract between the parties and the interpretation of the parties expressed in the disposition document is at issue, the contents of the text, the motive and background of the agreement, the purpose to be achieved by the agreement, the parties’ genuine intent, etc. shall be reasonably interpreted in accordance with logic and

(2) In light of the purport of the entire pleadings and the result of the examination of evidence, the court shall consider the whole purport of the arguments and the result of the examination of evidence to determine whether the assertion of facts is true in accordance with logical and empirical rules (Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act), and the facts duly confirmed by the court below that the judgment below did not go beyond the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, and that the court shall bind the Re-appeal Court.

(1) On the grounds indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that, in light of (1) the process of formulating a plan for implementing the instant housing site development project, the basic amount and the determination process of the contract amount, the Plaintiff’s participation in the tendering procedure, the process of bidding and the progress of bidding, the standards for payment of agency cost and the existence of settlement clause, etc., the instant contract is not a total contract with only the completion of the day, but a unit price contract with the calculation of the contract amount based on the cumulative number of households and the unit price per household unit price, and (2) the Plaintiff’s total contract price was reduced by winning a contract with the lower amount than the basic amount in the bidding process, and thus, the unit price of the instant contract is determined to have been changed to 4,766 won as the unit price per unit price per unit price per month, not to 4,516 won per unit price per unit price per unit price per unit price per unit area, but to 4,35

The grounds of appeal disputing the lower court’s fact-finding.