A. Defendant Yong-Nam Construction Co., Ltd.: (a) from May 30, 2016 to May 30, 2016, with respect to KRW 134,766,974 and the said money.

A. 1) The Plaintiff is both parties to the apartment complex 39 Yangsan-si, Yangsan-si, Yangsan-si, 8. The Plaintiff is both parties to the apartment complex of this case.

(2) Defendant Yong-Nam Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Yong-Nam Construction”) concluded a contract with the Plaintiff for the construction of a new apartment in the instant case (hereinafter “the instant contract for the first construction”), jointly with Defendant Yong-Nam Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Co., Ltd.”) and jointly carried out the construction of a new apartment in the instant case. Defendant Seosung Industrial Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Seosung Industries”) jointly and severally guaranteed the obligation under the instant first contract for the construction of the Defendant Yong-Nam and the building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of a building of this case.

3) Defendant Dongdong Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Dongdong Construction”)

A) The Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Plaintiff for landscaping construction work (hereinafter “instant second contract”).

Defendant Bosung Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Bosung”).

(4) Defendant Gangnam Engineering Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Gangnam Engineering Co., Ltd.”) had a contract for urban gas pipeline construction (hereinafter “instant third contract”) from the Plaintiff during the instant apartment construction project. Defendant Gangnam Engineering Co., Ltd., Ltd., on December 22, 2015, mutually changed from the Plaintiff to the Mechanical Equipment Construction Co., Ltd. Mutual Aid Association for the Construction of Mechanical Equipment and Facilities.

(hereinafter “Facility Construction Mutual Aid Association”). The instant contract was defective as to the third contract of this case.

B. On April 3, 2003, the apartment house of this case, which had lapsed the prior suit between the plaintiff and the council of occupants' representatives, began to move in from that time after obtaining approval for the use on April 3, 2003. The common area of the apartment of this case