공사대금
1. An incidental appeal against the principal lawsuit by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and an appeal against the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).
1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiff and the defendant citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance is examined together with the evidence additionally submitted in the court of first instance, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of
Therefore, the court's explanation on the instant case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for any dismissal or addition as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
On the 2nd page of the first instance judgment, the following parts shall be added to the “no dispute” of the 18th instance judgment.
【At the second hearing of this court, the Defendant expressed that “The Defendant concluded a contract with the Plaintiff regarding a design service agreement of the inter-party loan at the first instance court, but this is erroneous because it was written in disagreement with the certified judicial scrivener who prepared the document, and thus revoked the confession.” However, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff did not consent to the revocation of the confession, and the evidence alone submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to recognize that the confession of the Defendant was contrary to the truth and due to mistake, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the revocation of the confession is not effective.
2) The part of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the part of the judgment below 3 to 19 of the first instance, "(it is insufficient to recognize that the damage claim exceeds KRW 2.5 million only with the evidence submitted by the defendant in light of the degree, scope, etc. of the defect, and there is no other evidence to recognize it), although the defendant's claim for damages in lieu of the defect in the design drawings and specifications that the plaintiff provided for the defect repair was asserted against the plaintiff's design service payment claim."
【Defendant (the Defendant) has any defect in the design documents provided by the Plaintiff, and the Defendant has a big theory on the delivery date.