1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. All the plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim added at the trial.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendant are between high school and the Defendant, and D are the husband of the land owner G, who owns the land, and the Defendant and the Defendant are the human-friendly relatives of the wife G, as the husband of the land owner G (as of July 25, 201, whose name is changed to “P”).

B. D performed a development project at the one-time C in the strike, and the Plaintiff, from November 2008 to December 2, 2008, continued to implement the C Daily Land Corporation (hereinafter “instant Corporation”).

C. On December 3, 2008, the Defendant confirmed that the above construction was carried out without a superior level as stated in the statement attached to H representative A and field manager I by agreement with the ordering person, and this data shall be dealt with at the time of settlement of the construction cost (120% of the actual input amount). The ordering person: D indicated in the name of D and the name of the Defendant, “C” and the name of the Defendant on December 3, 2008, written and delivered a document (Evidence No. 1; hereinafter “instant confirmation document”).

53,684,427 won (i.e., KRW 40,056,456 as of November 30, 2008) incurred by the Plaintiff in the instant construction (i.e., KRW 13,627,971 from December 1, 2008 to December 17, 2008).

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 2 (including additional number), Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) is the Plaintiff’s assertion, and the Plaintiff and the Defendant are 120% of the actual input amount, but the Plaintiff agreed to receive the construction cost after two to three months from the end of the construction work and agreed to receive the construction cost. The Plaintiff’s input of the instant construction work is KRW 53,684,427, and the Defendant is obligated to pay, as the ordering person of the instant construction work, the Plaintiff the payment of the construction cost of this case (i.e., KRW 64,421,312 (= KRW 53,684,427 + 120%) and damages for delay from January 1, 2009.

(2) The defendant alleged by the defendant is the plaintiff of this case.