The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

after the filing of an appeal.

1. The grounds for this part of the reasoning are as follows: (a) the part of the “1. Basic Facts” of the 2nd 7 to 5th 5th eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth e

2. Summary of the parties' arguments;

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Although the Plaintiff faithfully performed the instant construction work in accordance with the instant contract that was effective by the resolution of the first instance council of the Defendant on February 25, 2014, the Defendant requested the discontinuance of construction and concluded a contract with another company on November 2015, and unilaterally reversed the instant contract after the Defendant unilaterally concluded a contract for construction work with the other company. This may be rescinded by the contractor until the Defendant completed the work under Article 673 of the Civil Act (the right to cancel the contract before completion).

applicable to the cancellation of the instant contract under this subsection.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s damages amounting to KRW 1,188,638,977 (i.e., construction expenses incurred by the Plaintiff’s actual inputs (i.e., KRW 599,709,975) and damages for delay incurred by the Plaintiff when the construction was completed).

2) Even if the instant contract was not effective,

Even if assumed, the defendant obtained the above 1,188,638,977 won without any legal ground due to the plaintiff's work, and sought the return of the unfair profit against the defendant.

B. The gist of the Defendant’s assertion 1) The instant contract ought to be based on the method of disposal of the Defendant’s land allotted by the authorities in recompense for development outlay, which was resolved by the members’ general meeting or the representatives’ meeting pursuant to the former Land Partition Adjustment Business Act

However, on February 25, 2014, the defendant's resolution on February 25, 2014 was null and void due to the absence of a resolution or defect in the procedure, and the conclusion of the instant contract was made by the general meeting of partners or the board of representatives, which is otherwise effective.