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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

A. On May 16, 2012, Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D ground “Ecafeteria” (hereinafter “instant building”) shared 1/2 shares by the Defendant and F. The F entered into a lease agreement between the Codefendant B of the first instance trial by setting the deposit amount of KRW 50 million for the instant building, the deposit amount of KRW 3.5 million for the rent, and the lease period from April 14, 2012 to April 14, 2014.

B. On May 24, 2012, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for construction (hereinafter “instant contract for construction”) with co-defendant B of the first instance trial, which provides for KRW 100,000,000 of the cost for the interior facility construction of the instant building (excluding value-added tax).

C. The co-defendant A entered into an oral agreement with the Plaintiff that he/she would be jointly and severally liable for the instant construction contract as the mother of the co-defendant B in the first instance trial as the actual operator of the above E-cafeteria.

On April 12, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the construction work under the instant construction contract, and the co-defendant B of the first instance court paid KRW 70,000,000 to the Plaintiff out of the construction cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 3, 4, 7-1 to 4, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Before the Plaintiff performed the internal facility construction work under the instant construction contract, the Defendant, the owner of the instant building, first of all, had the Macheon Construction Work, floor-to-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-sto-s to-s to-s to-s to-sto-s to-s to-s to-s to-sto-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s to-s

3 Even if the obligation to settle the above is not recognized to the defendant, this shall not apply.