1. The Defendant’s KRW 400,000,000 as well as annual 6% from October 17, 2013 to August 14, 2014 to the Plaintiff.

1. On March 13, 2012, the Plaintiff contracted the instant construction work to the Defendant (the name of the construction: C’s new construction of urban residential housing, the construction site: Yeongdeungpo-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D, E,F, and G).

A contract made in relation to the instant project shall be entered as follows: ① (A) contract (the contract amount shall be KRW 3,680,000,000, KRW 200,000, and KRW 100,000,000, and KRW 100,000,000 and KRW 100,000,00 in addition to the contract amount) and ② contract (the contract amount shall be KRW 3,380,000, KRW 4,380,000, and KRW 4,000,000, including personal expenses).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2,3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. H, who received the power of representation from the Plaintiff’s assertion regarding the conclusion of the contract, delegated I with the conclusion of the contract for work price of 3,680,000,000.

I has drawn up a contract within the scope of his power of representation.

However, I have prepared a contract to change the construction cost to KRW 4,380,000 without authority.

(2) The Plaintiff’s employees paid KRW 4,380,000 to the Defendant according to the contract amount.

(2) The contract shall be null and void if the I, an authorized representative, has prepared the contract for the work price of which is four thousand won or more.

The defendant shall return KRW 700,000,000 paid to the plaintiff without any legal ground.

B. The Defendant’s assertion ② The contract was authenticly prepared in the presence of the Plaintiff.

(2) Even if I prepares a contract without authority, Article 126 of the Civil Code is established as an expression agent.

Since construction cost of KRW 4,380,000 has been paid from the plaintiff's account, there was ratification of act of unauthorized Representation.

3. Determination

A. (2) In full view of whether the contract was authentic or not, Gap 2 and 3’s entry and writing, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the defendant recognized that the contract was signed and sealed I, and that the signature and seal of the contract was made by I, and ①, the plaintiff of the contract was signed and sealed.