1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. The main office;

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: ① from five to nine of the fifth to nine of the judgment of the court of first instance; ② from the addition of the judgment of the court of first instance as to the new argument in the trial, the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that for the judgment of the court of first instance; and thus, the same is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of

The part 2) as to the assertion that the performance stipulated in the construction contract of this case is null and void because it is uncertain or impossible, the payment cannot be deemed as uncertain, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the performance of the phrases of this case is unaffortuable. Rather, if the above appraiser's appraisal results and inquiry results of the appraisal of Hong Profit Basic T&C executed by the defendant, the above appraiser calculated the cost of the ground reinforcement of the construction work in the amount of KRW 180,920,00 for the maintenance of grades A to five years," and the above statement cannot be deemed to be serious enough if the ground reinforcement of the construction work was conducted by the defendant by the Daecom method or by any other public law.

The defendant's above assertion is without merit.

“”

B. (1) The Defendant asserted that the main benefit of the instant construction contract is to ensure the safety of the building, and the phrase of this case only has the incidental meaning, as the Defendant fulfilled its main duty of urgency, the Plaintiff cannot rescind the instant construction contract due to the failure to perform the phrase of this case. However, the instant construction contract was concluded with one party to whom the building of this case was to be paid.