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 reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the court of first instance, in addition to adding the following judgments to the Plaintiff’s new allegations and claims by this court, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 42

(In light of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court of first instance, the fact-finding and the judgment of the court of first instance are justifiable even if the evidence additionally submitted was presented in the court of first instance). 2. Additional judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts to the effect that the construction contract concluded with E in the same business relationship with the defendant is valid, and the defendant is obligated to pay the construction cost under the above construction contract.

In full view of the aforementioned evidence E’s testimony, it can be acknowledged that E had dealt with a little deal of the following facts: (a) assist the Defendant and the development of the land of this case.

However, a partnership agreement refers to a contract under which two or more persons establish an organization for the purpose of running a joint business by investing money, other property, or labor, and thereby, members receive or bear the profits or losses in the management of the joint business according to each ratio. It is difficult to deem that there was an agreement between the defendant and E to receive or bear the profits or losses in the management of the joint business solely on the ground that E dealt with a somewhat little work with the defendant's Do, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion based on the premise that the defendant and E had a partnership relationship is without merit.

B. At the time of the conclusion of the construction contract on the instant land by E, the Plaintiff indicated the fact that the Defendant was acting for the Defendant as a representative director, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the construction price to the Plaintiff according to the apparent representation liability under Article 126 of the Civil Act.