공사비반환
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is KRW 6,359,158 and also the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).
1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the written reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act
2. The gist of the assertion is that the Plaintiff also has a defect in the part of the instant construction work that the Defendant had failed to perform and executed. As such, the Defendant sought payment of 71,392,048 won calculated by subtracting KRW 36,00,000 of the construction cost not paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant from the amount added to the construction cost and the amount of damages for defect repair in the portion of the instant construction work (i.e., the amount claimed by the alteration of the purport of the incidental appeal of KRW 12,257,509 for the first instance trial) and damages for delay.
On the other hand, the defendant, while disputing the details of the non-construction and defects claimed by the plaintiff, seek for the payment of 59,460,000 won for the remainder of the construction work to the plaintiff as a counterclaim, and for the payment of 28,080,000 won for the additional construction work, and for the installation of 2,050,000 won for the f6,130,000 won for the f6,130,000 won for the f,670,000 won for the f,670,000 won for the f,670,000 won for the f,00 won for the d
3. Determination
A. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, as it is, under the main sentence of Article 420 of the same Act.
(B) Of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the amount of the quoted KRW 15,640,000 is KRW 15,640,000, KRW 6,040, which is the part to be constructed by the Defendant. ② The toilet type work of the instant building is the part to be executed by the Defendant; ② The floor of the toilet among the instant building is to be constructed by the instant construction contract (in accordance with the evidence No. 1 of Section B, the floor of the toilet is a material waterproof/sacrification; ③ the inner wall is to be built by the “water waterproof/sacrification/scrification,” ③ the Defendant’s failure to perform this part of the construction, directly selected and executed the self-quality work of which the Plaintiff is high,