1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The following facts may be found in the absence of dispute between the parties, or in full view of Gap evidence Nos. 14, 15, 19 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 4, and the testimony of the witness F of the first instance trial, the whole purport of the pleadings.

Around February 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract with the Plaintiff to divide and sell six parcels of land in Yongcheon-si E (hereinafter referred to as “each parcel of land in this case”) to the Plaintiff Company C (hereinafter referred to as “C”), the Pungdong Industry (hereinafter referred to as “Pung”), the Pungjin Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Seojin”), and Seojinjin Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “C, etc.”) under the intermediation of F, a director of the Plaintiff Company.

B. C, etc. planned to construct a factory on each of the instant lands purchased, and the Plaintiff performed the civil engineering work to create each of the instant lands as a factory site (hereinafter “the instant civil engineering work”) from May 2013 to December of the same year.

2. Determination as to the conclusion of a contract for civil engineering works

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant should pay to the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 118,54,800 (61,949,800 KRW 31,295,300, KRW 25,300, KRW 200, and KRW 118,54,800, including the portion C, KRW 61,949,80, KRW 295,000, KRW 25,300,00, and KRW 25,300, inasmuch as the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to perform the civil works on each of the instant land around 2013.

In regard to this, the Defendant asserted that, although there was a fact that each of the instant lands was sold to C, etc. as above, the Plaintiff did not conclude a contract for civil engineering works on each of the instant lands at the time of contract.

B. There is no dispute between the parties to the judgment, or the statements in Gap evidence 10 through 13, 17, and 23, witness F of the first instance trial, G testimony of the first instance trial, and the fact-finding results and the whole purport of the arguments against the director of the Seogu Tax Office of the first instance trial are recognized or known.