1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim for damages arising from a tort added in the trial are all dismissed.

2...

1. The court's explanation of this case is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing this case as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

However, the decision of the court of first instance shall be made in part as follows, and the decision of the court of first instance shall be added to the decision of the plaintiff, which is newly or repeatedly asserted by the court of first instance, as follows:

[Supplementary part] The "re-sale and re-sale" in the 5th sentence from the second page of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be applied to "re-building and parcelling-out."

On September 2010, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded the first modification contract with the content of the construction work that changes around 9-6 of the first instance trial's 9-6 (part 1 of the second instance judgment's 9-6) as follows: "The construction work that changes around 1,827,856,00 won into the balcony expansion work for the general household unit (excluding outside new city) and the outer wall of the apartment house (one to two floors)"; and the first modification contract (Evidence 1-2 of the first instance judgment) contains detailed descriptions of the construction work that changes by process and the construction cost increased accordingly. The first modification contract with the first instance court's 11-5 [Article 11-2 of the first instance judgment's 11-5 [Article 10-2 of the first instance judgment's 10-2 of the second instance judgment's 10-2 of the second instance judgment's 19-2 of the first instance judgment's 10-10-2 of the construction work execution work.

2. Additional determination

A. Summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion regarding the amendment of the construction contract.