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. Basic facts

A. D, representing C (hereinafter referred to as “C”), entered into a banking work agreement with the Defendant and the construction period from December 2016 to February 2017, 2016, to fill up land E and F (hereinafter referred to as “E”) owned by the Defendant, and obtained permission for the development of land for the purpose of raising farmland in the name of the Defendant from the smuggling market (hereinafter referred to as “C”) under the name of the Defendant.

B. On January 9, 2017, the Plaintiff paid KRW 20 million to C, and received the said right to engage in development activities.

C. From January 12, 2017 to January 15, 2017, the Plaintiff carried earth and sand taken out at the construction site of Yangsan G at the construction site to be filled up with E and one parcel.

The Syang-si issued an order to take measures for waste treatment (replacement order) to H on the ground that construction waste (construction waste) was included in the earth and sand brought into the E and one parcel.

From February 3, 2017 to February 7, 2017, the Plaintiff brought into the said land in accordance with the order of removal. D.

From April 24, 2017 to May 18, 2017, the Plaintiff completed embling operations by transporting soil and sand taken out from the construction site of Yangsan, Inc., the Defendant-owned two parcels of land located in E and its adjacent parts (hereinafter referred to as “the total land of the four parcels of land”) to the instant land.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 12, and 16 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1 Plaintiff transferred his/her authority to fill up land E and one parcel from C and carried out the construction with the Defendant’s consent of transfer. The Plaintiff’s allegation is the cost of earth and sand discharge, which was paid to the Defendant around April 27, 2017, on the grounds that it was impossible to find a construction site to be taken out of earth and sand in the vicinity, after putting down earth and sand mixed with the Defendant in accordance with the disposition of scambling.