1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid additionally shall be revoked.

1. The Plaintiff entered into a contract for new construction works with the Defendant four times through D, as seen in the following sub-paragraph 2, as an individual entrepreneur who engages in construction business in the name of “C”, and engages in the business of purchasing real estate, building, and investment brokerage, and the Plaintiff entered into a contract for new construction works for each construction project. There was a dispute over the contractual amount, additional construction, and the fixed-term construction cost, etc. by each construction

2. Assertion and determination

A. The fact that the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the construction of a new building E (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant for construction works in Sinsi-si (hereinafter “instant contract”) is not a dispute between the parties.

The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is obligated to pay KRW 1,100,000 for the construction cost of active fish, concrete strawing construction cost according to the instant contract. However, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff agreed with the Defendant to construct the same content as the Defendant’s allegation only with the video and witness D’s testimony in the first instance trial.

The Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff expenses or damages incurred by the Plaintiff in accordance with the provisions of Article 739 of the Civil Act. However, even according to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff cannot be deemed to have carried out another person’s business without any obligation since the Plaintiff carried out construction works necessary for completion of construction works under the instant contract No. 1.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion is not accepted.

B. According to each entry of F Contract for Construction Work (1) and Evidence A No. 3 and Evidence A No. 6-1, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant on February 6, 2007 for construction of a new building (hereinafter “instant contract”). A building under the instant contract for construction work may be recognized as having been completed on June 22, 2007, and the Defendant completed the construction on June 22, 2007.