A. As for Defendant Daewoo Construction Co., Ltd, 201,041,726 won and its corresponding amount shall be from December 17, 2013 to April 17, 2014.

A. The status of the parties is an autonomous management body composed of the occupants to manage A apartment complex A (hereinafter referred to as the “instant apartment complex”) 7 to 426 households and ancillary facilities in Gwangjin-gu, and the non-party B Housing Reconstruction Project Association (hereinafter referred to as the “Non-party B Housing Reconstruction Project Association”) is a project implementer who newly constructed and sold the instant apartment complex, and the defendant Ku Treatment Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the “Defendant Treatment Construction”) is a new construction work of the instant apartment from the non-party partnership under a contract with the non-party partnership.

B. On December 10, 2007, Defendant Daewoo Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Seoul Guarantee Insurance”) entered into each of the warranty contracts for the instant apartment as indicated below (hereinafter “each of the instant warranty contracts”) with the Defendant Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd.”) and was issued a warranty from the Defendant Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd.

Since then, the guarantee creditor of each guarantee contract of this case was changed from the luminous viewing to the plaintiff.

The warranty period of the No. 1 C 1 C from December 5, 2007 to December 4, 2008 (1 year) 348,607,908 2D 2 D 2, 2007 to December 4, 2007 from December 5, 2007 to December 4, 2009 (2 years) 348,607,908 3 E E 3, 2007 to December 5, 2007 to December 4, 2010 (3 years) 52,911,8624 F 24 on December 5, 2007 to December 5, 2007; 261,455, G 931 to December 15, 2007; 195 to December 14, 2015;

C. The apartment of this case was inspected on December 7, 2007, and the apartment of this case was inspected on the use of the apartment of this case, and the defendant Ku Treatment Construction failed to construct the part to be constructed according to the design drawing, or modified the design drawing differently from the defective construction or design drawing. 2) The plaintiff continuously requested the repair of defects from February 2, 2008 at the request of the occupants of the apartment of this case and the sectional owners, and the repair construction for some defects is also implemented.