1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. According to the following: (a) there is no dispute between the parties to the underlying facts; or (b) according to the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 12 and Eul evidence No. 8; and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "Defendant B") entered into a contract with E Co., Ltd. for the extension of factories for one parcel of land other than F at the time of harmony with E Co., Ltd. on November 29, 2013; and (b) the defendant C was the head

2. Judgment as to the main claim against Defendant B

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the construction contract was concluded between Defendant C and the Defendant C, who represented by Defendant B, on the road construction, sewerage construction, tree transfer, landscaping construction, and installation work of temporary tent storage (hereinafter “instant construction contract”). The said construction contract was implemented.

The defendant C was the head of the field office of the defendant C, and in accordance with the legal principles of expression representation as referred to in Articles 125 through 126 of the Civil Code, the defendant C should pay the plaintiff the construction price of 38,385,000 won and the delay damages.

B. It is insufficient to find that Defendant C entered into the instant construction contract with the Plaintiff on behalf of the Defendant B only with each of the descriptions or images of the evidence Nos. 1, 1, 3, and 16 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), and there is no other evidence to find otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit without further review.

3. Determination as to the conjunctive claim against the Defendants

A. If it is not recognized that the Plaintiff’s assertion and Defendant B entered into the instant construction contract, it is reasonable to deem that Defendant B obtained benefits equivalent to the construction cost that the Plaintiff performed without any legal cause. As such, Defendant B, as a return of unjust enrichment, shall pay the amount equivalent to the said construction cost and the delay damages to the Plaintiff.

In addition, Defendant C’s conclusion of the instant construction contract from Defendant B.