Costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

1. Plaintiff’s ground of appeal

A. Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court acknowledged KRW 79,208,793 as damages in lieu of the Plaintiff’s defect repair due to defective construction, modified construction, and non-construction.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower court did not err by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, etc.

B. The second ground of appeal rejected the Plaintiff’s additional construction cost claim as to the shipbuilding cable pipeline destruction work on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower judgment did not err by violating the rules of evidence, etc.

2. As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal

A. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, determined that the design drawings received by the Plaintiff at the time of the instant construction contract was the design drawings of the evidence No. 7.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the record, the lower judgment did not err by violating the rules of evidence, etc.

B. On November 30, 2013, prior to the completion date of the instant construction project, the lower court, based on its stated reasoning, determined that the Plaintiff requested a completion inspection to the Defendant after completing the instant construction project.

Examining the record in light of the relevant legal principles, the lower judgment did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the time of completion of the instant construction project, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against each party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.