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. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, and this case is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. The Plaintiff asserts that, in light of the fact that the co-defendant C of the first instance trial obtained the right of representation from the deceased, applied for provisional attachment and cancelled provisional attachment against the Plaintiff, and delivered a written consent to land use as indicated as C at the time of the instant sales contract, and thus exercising the deceased’s property right, C has received the right of representation from the deceased. The Plaintiff asserts that the expression agent under Article 126 or 129 of the Civil Act has been established on the ground that there is justifiable grounds to believe that C has the right to conclude the instant sales contract on behalf of the deceased.

The testimony of the witness I of the first instance trial alone is insufficient to recognize that the deceased granted the right of representation to the plaintiff with regard to provisional seizure or a series of property rights. Since there is no other evidence to acknowledge this, the above assertion of the plaintiff is without merit without the need for further review.

In addition, the plaintiff argued that the contract was ratified by impliedly considering that the deceased did not raise any objection to the contract of this case from the date of the conclusion of the purchase price to the time of death. However, the ratification of invalidation or unauthorized representation is a single act with knowledge that the act was null and void, and it does not require a certain method as to the method of declaration of intent, so it can be done in an implied manner. However, in order to recognize implied ratification, the plaintiff can fully understand the legal status of the person's act and, even if so, recognize that the result of the act belongs to him.