The judgment below

The part against the Defendants is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the grounds of appeal on the defense before the merits, the lower court rejected the Defendants’ prior defense on the merits, on the grounds of its stated reasoning, on the following grounds: (a) the phrase of “a letter of performance included in the project participation proposal submitted by the Plaintiff to Defendant A Apartment Reconstruction Association (hereinafter “Defendant Association”) that the Defendant Union promised to comply with the Defendant Union’s decision without raising any civil or criminal objection against the loss of qualifications for the trial works or the invalidation of the selection of the trial works; and (b) the lower court determined that it cannot be interpreted as a non-contentious agreement that the Plaintiff would not file the instant claim.

Examining the record, the above determination by the court below is justifiable.

There is no illegality of exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

2. As to the assertion on the legal nature of the instant project expenses and the claim for the repayment of loans for the project expenses

A. We examine the gist of this part of the judgment of the court below.

(1) The lower court first acknowledged the following facts.

① The Plaintiff is a company with the purpose of housing construction business and housing site development business. The Defendant Union is a housing reconstruction project association which completed the registration of incorporation on July 30, 2003 with the authorization of establishment on January 21, 2003 in order to promote a project for the reconstruction of a A apartment (hereinafter “instant project”) on the ground of 128,498.85 square meters of land outside Busan Northern-gu G, Busan, and 10 lots of land.

② Around September 30, 2002, the Defendant Union announced a public announcement for the selection of the contractor of the instant project. On September 30, 2002, the Plaintiff submitted to the Defendant Union a project participation proposal to be selected as the contractor of the instant project. On October 19, 2002, the Defendant Union was selected as the contractor of the instant project.

③ The Plaintiff is the Defendant on October 8, 2003.