A. Defendant B Co., Ltd.: (a) starting from August 14, 2014 for KRW 805,900,923 and for KRW 101,00,000 among them;

A. The Plaintiff is an autonomous management body that consists of the representatives elected by the occupants of the 11,122 households, Dong-si, 11, Dong-si, A apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant B”) is a project proprietor and a contractor who constructed and sold the instant apartment, and the Defendant Korea Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation (Korea Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation pursuant to Article 4 of the Addenda to the Housing and Urban Fund Act changed the name to the Korea Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation; hereinafter “Defendant Corporation”) is a guarantor who entered into a warranty contract on the instant apartment with Defendant B, regardless of whether it was before or after the change of the name.

B. Defendant B, who entered into a warranty contract, entered into each of the warranty contracts on the apartment of this case with Defendant Corporation as indicated below (hereinafter “instant warranty contract”) and was issued by Defendant Corporation a warranty.

Since then, the guarantee creditor of the contract of this case was changed to the plaintiff in the main market.

The warranty period of 1 from November 22, 2006 to November 21, 2007 (1) 554,707,200 from November 22, 2006 to November 21, 2006 (2 years from November 22, 2006 to November 21, 2008) 54,707,2003 from November 22, 2006 to November 21, 2008 (2 years), 832,060,804 from November 22, 2009 to November 21, 2009 (3 years), and 832,060,804 from November 22, 2006 to November 21, 201 (5 years)

C. The instant apartment was inspected on December 5, 2006 on the usage inspection and defect of the apartment of this case, and the Defendant B failed to construct the part to be constructed according to the design drawing regarding the instant apartment of this case or constructed by changing the same differently from the defective construction or design drawing.

In this regard, the Plaintiff continuously requested the repair of defects at the request of the occupants and sectional owners of the apartment of this case from the time of the pre-use inspection, and the repair work for some defects by the Defendant B.