1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the additional payment order under paragraph (2) below.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 2013, the Defendant entered into a contract on the construction work (hereinafter “instant construction work”) to create a site for electric power supply and planting landscaping trees (hereinafter “instant construction work”) on the land on F, G, and H three lots of land (hereinafter “instant land”) in Chungcheong-si, the Defendant owned by D via D (hereinafter “E”) and the Defendant. The construction cost agreed at the time was KRW 1,100,000,000.

B. Around February 2014, D renounced the instant construction work, and the Defendant: (a) made the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff, who actually performed the said construction work on the said site, to the effect that “the Plaintiff continues to perform the said construction work, and the Defendant paid the construction cost thereof to the Plaintiff; and (b) paid KRW 701,00,000 as the instant construction cost.”

C. On November 26, 2015, the Plaintiff continued the instant construction and received a certificate of completion of development activities on a housing site preparation project from the Chungcheong Market.

[Reasons for Recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, Eul evidence No. 1 (the document with a serial number shall include a serial number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In full view of Gap evidence 2 (Judgment as to the authenticity of the standard contract for private construction works), Gap evidence 18, 24, and 28, and the fact-finding conducted by the court of first instance with respect to Gap's IO as a whole, the following facts are acknowledged: (a) the standard contract for private construction works in Gap evidence 27, No. 27, and the standard contract for private construction works in Gap evidence 28, and the standard contract for private construction works in Gap evidence 27 shall be deemed to be made by the defendant or at least by the defendant's seal in a business relationship with the defendant at least, and since each of the above seals is identical to Gap evidence 2, it may be recognized that Gap evidence 2 was cut off with the defendant's seal.