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. The reasons why the court accepted the judgment of the court of first instance for the instant case are as follows: (a) the “18,305,00 won” in the third sentence of the judgment of first instance as “18,305,00 won”; and (b) the “whether the construction price has been settled by agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant around September 11, 2013,” which is the main issue of the instant case, is as stated in the fourth sentence of the judgment of first instance, except where the following judgment is added to the end of the fourth sentence of the judgment of first instance; and (c) such judgment is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[The Plaintiff, as the cause of the instant claim, sought payment of the construction cost of KRW 134,178,00 in addition to the total construction cost of KRW 245,30,000 in addition to the total construction cost of KRW 134,178,00 in addition to the total construction cost of KRW 245,30,00 under the instant construction contract (i.e., the changed construction drawings). As to the increased construction cost of KRW 15,873,00 in addition to the increased construction cost of KRW 118,305,00 due to the change in the construction drawings, the first instance court appears to have completed the instant construction work upon mutual consultation on September 11, 2013, by taking into account the circumstances such as the change

The plaintiff's claim was dismissed on the ground that it is "."

The plaintiff basically repeats the same argument in the first instance court. The plaintiff's judgment of the first instance court is just, even if considering the allegations and reasons partially supplemented by the plaintiff, and the statement of Gap evidence 6 additionally submitted is examined.

[] On the fourth half of the judgment of the court of first instance, the following judgments are added to the end of the fourth part of the judgment. "The facts that the construction drawings were modified more complicated than the first one at the defendant's request during the construction work of this case are not disputed between the parties, and the construction cost was calculated as a result of the appraisal of the construction cost, which increased considerably in the amount of KRW 134,178,000, compared to the first one, the plaintiff and the defendant in relation to the construction work of this case, taking full account of the overall purport of the arguments presented earlier