공사대금
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows. Thus, the court’s reasoning for this case is identical to the ground for the judgment of the first instance except for adding the following contents. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420
o No. 4 of the first instance court’s decision No. 17, “No. 17,” added “In addition, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff actually carried out the additional construction work equivalent to KRW 500 million at the request of the Defendants, on the sole basis of the descriptions of the evidence No. 10-1, No. 2, 11, and No. 16-1 and No. 2 of the evidence No. 10-2, and there is no other evidence. It is difficult to conclude that the Defendants, even having written the said contract for the alteration of construction, assert that it is invalid, immediately goes against the good faith principle, or confession that they
2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety. It is so decided as per Disposition.