Text

1. All appeals against the instant principal lawsuit and counterclaim by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are filed.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) No. 8 of the judgment of the court of first instance: (b) No. 15 to No. 21 of the instant construction work, which had been conducted by the Plaintiff in connection with the premise of appraisal, appears to have been conducted without implementing systematic succession procedures based on the design drawings and specifications, and the contract specifications based on the fixed quantity of the remaining construction works at the time the Plaintiff continued to perform the instant construction work, which had been conducted by C; (c) the distinction between the first construction portion, the Plaintiff’s construction portion, and the third party’s construction portion is uncertain; and (d) the design drawings and specifications offered by the Defendant are not systematic construction specifications based on the contract specifications; and (d) it is difficult to assess the construction cost and defect repair cost of the Plaintiff; and (e) it is difficult to determine the appropriateness of the appraisal cost of the first instance judgment based on the evidence presented by the Plaintiff, other than the design drawings and specifications offered by the Defendant, and thus, it is difficult to determine the construction cost of the Plaintiff’s and the main body.