1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the same part of the judgment of the court of first instance, is dismissed as follows. In addition to the determination of paragraph (2) as to the assertion of expression representation newly raised by the plaintiff in this court, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance

2. The “seven lots” in the 13rd place shall be deemed as “six lots” (one thousand and twenty-six square meters divided into six lots of land among the above land and one thousand and twenty-six square meters in the petitioner-gu, Cheongju-si and one thousand and twenty-six square meters in the Gu, Cheongju-si and one thousand and twenty-six square meters in the Gu, Cheongju-si).

The agreement on the design modification at the bottom of 4 pages 1 shall be construed as “agreement on the Design Modification and the Increase in the Construction Price,” 5 pages 13 as “design modification and the increased Construction Price,” and 14 pages 14 of the same section as “design modification and the increased Construction Price,” respectively.

At the bottom of five pages, the term "Saeng-gu" shall be raised to "Saeng-gu".

At the bottom of 10 pages, “Ap. 11, 12 (including paper numbers),” shall be deleted.

2. Judgment on the Plaintiff’s assertion of expression representation

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion, even if there was no agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on the change of the design and construction cost of the instant construction, the Plaintiff’s director F, who requested the Plaintiff to undertake the follow-up construction work following the change of the design, concluded the instant contract on behalf of the Defendant, and had basic power of attorney, such as taking exclusive charge of consultation on the management and supervision of the instant construction site, and on the modification of the design, and taking follow-up construction work following the change of the design exceeds the scope of the basic right of attorney or the extinguished basic right of attorney, and thus, the Plaintiff is deemed to have such power of representation in accordance with the concurrence under Article 126 of the Civil Act or Article 126 and Article 129 of the Civil Act.

B. Apparent representation beyond the authority stipulated in Article 126 of the Civil Code of 198 is currently the power of representation.