A. On August 17, 2017, the Plaintiff concluded a construction contract for the construction of a rain forest facility (hereinafter “instant facility”) on the rooftop of the Plaintiff’s housing located in Defendant and Kimcheon-si, Kimcheon-si (the nominal owner in the register of the Plaintiff’s wife D; hereinafter “instant housing”).

(hereinafter “instant contract”). (b)

The construction cost of the instant contract was KRW 9,000,000, and the Defendant completed the construction of the instant facility on the rooftop in accordance with the instant contract.

C. On March 1, 2018, the instant facility went far from the rooftop by winding on March 1, 2018, and the vinyl was collapsed by covering the plastic houses even with the distribution of nearby farmland.

In 8,200,000 won, the Plaintiff carried out the restoration work for the rain c,00,000 won as the cost of the restoration work for the roof rail destroyed along with the instant facilities, and 11,940,000 won as the cost of the restoration work for the plastic houses collapsed by covering the instant facilities, and 3,363,870 won as the material cost.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 7 (if there are virtual numbers, including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant facilities were installed by the Defendant, while installing the instant facilities, caused defective construction by omitting an intermediate pole and making it inferior to adjoining the instant facilities, and thus, the instant facilities came to wind. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 8,200,000 in the cost of restoring the slope facilities, KRW 3,000,00 in the cost of restoring the rooftop railing, KRW 1,000,00 in the cost of other expenses, KRW 15,303,870 in the cost of restoring the nearby field, KRW 5,00,00 in the solatium for mental damages, and damages incurred therefrom.

B. Since there was an illegal building illegally extended on the instant house rooftop by the Defendant’s assertion, the space of columns could not be properly met, and the construction was completed normally in accordance with the site conditions, and there was no defective construction, such as a defect in the contact.

March 1, 2018