The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of Paragraph 1 of the part concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main text of

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the contractor of the instant construction, and the Defendant B, as the husband of the instant construction, is in the position of the joint contractor with the Defendant C by practically supervising the instant construction and bearing expenses.

Therefore, the Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 10,957,50 (i.e., KRW 56,870,000 for the additional construction work of this case - KRW 39,00 for the principal principal of Decision 2018Da73086, Jun. 13, 2018; and (ii) KRW 42,412,50 for the legal interest from Jun. 13, 2018 to Jan. 11, 2019, KRW 3,500 for the lighting machinery cost of this case - KRW 500,00 for the lighting machinery cost of this case).

3. The reasoning of this court regarding the claim against Defendant B is as stated in Paragraph 2 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the following parts, and thus, this part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The witness "B" and "B" witness of the first instance court of Grade 7 of the judgment of the first instance.

4. Determination as to the claim against Defendant C

A. As seen earlier, the fact that the Plaintiff was awarded a contract for the instant additional construction works by Defendant C, and that the Plaintiff agreed to be paid the expenses actually paid or to be paid as the additional construction costs for the instant additional construction works, the said agreement refers to the cost of construction including only the expenses, such as direct and indirect material cost, direct and indirect labor cost, and insurance premium, and it is reasonable to interpret that general management cost or construction business operator’s profit is not included in general management cost.

Gap evidence 3-1 and 2-2, and witness G of the first instance trial G Co., Ltd.