The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

After compiling the adopted evidence, the court below rejected the Plaintiff’s primary claim on the ground that an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the amount to be borne by the Plaintiff out of the expenses incurred in installing school facilities cannot be deemed to have been reached by the method of multiplying the cost of creating a housing site by the cost of creating a housing site, and further, there was an agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the settlement of accounts with the cost of creating a housing site or the cost of installing school facilities at the subsequent stage of calculating the amount to be borne by the Defendant at the present point of time, and it is apparent that the amount to be borne by the Defendant is less than the amount to be borne by the Plaintiff even if it is calculated again at the present point of time by the settlement agreement, and therefore, there was no charge to be additionally paid by the Defendant to

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the record, the lower court did not err in its judgment as alleged in the grounds of appeal by misapprehending the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the interpretation of declaration of intent in cases where the parties to the contract make a written statement of intent, which is a disposal document, or by omitting the determination regarding the order of appropriation claimed by the Plaintiff, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided by the assent of all participating Justices.