1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons why the court should explain in this judgment are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the cases where a part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is changed as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Parts to be dried;

A. Part 13 of the 5th trial decision of the court of first instance stating that “The letter of undertaking and the letter of waiver of the construction shall be prepared,” “The Plaintiff shall prepare the letter of undertaking and the letter of waiver of the construction (the Plaintiff asserts that “the letter of commitment and the letter of waiver of the construction will be drafted contrary to the Plaintiff’s intent, but there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge it).”

(b)The following shall be added between the sixth and fourth sentence of the first instance judgment:

Furthermore, an unfair legal act stipulated in Article 104 of the Civil Act is aimed at regulating an act of brushing, rashness, or influence by a person in a critical position. Therefore, even if the injured party was in an imminent state, if the injured party was aware of the circumstances on the part of the injured party, and thus, he/she did not constitute an unfair legal act as stipulated in Article 104 of the Civil Act, unless he/she was aware of such intent to use it, i.e., bad faith, or there was no significant imbalance between payment and consideration objectively (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da40353, 40360, Sept. 26, 2013).

C. The part of “Supreme Court Decision 65Da1302 Decided September 21, 1965” in the 6th instance judgment of the first instance court was followed by “Supreme Court Decision 65Da1302 Decided September 21, 1965; Supreme Court Decision 70Da2802 Decided February 23, 1971.”

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.