A. The summary of the instant case pertains to the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of the warranty bond under the warranty contract (504,312,749 won) and the delay damages against the Defendant, by asserting that the warranty accident as stipulated in the warranty contract concluded with the Defendant regarding the second apartment of the Korea-U.S. Case.

The first instance court accepted some of the plaintiff's claims (212,690,676 won and damages for delay) and dismissed the remaining claims, and the defendant appealed against the part against which he lost.

B. The reasoning for the court's explanation on this part of the presumed facts is that the five pages of the judgment of the court of first instance [the detailed statement on the cost of repair of defects] are changed to the table below, and the items of "the partial non-construction of non-execution of non-execution of non-execution of non-execution of non-execution of non-execution of non-execution of non-execution of non-execution of non-execution of non-execution of non-performance of the non-performance of the non-performance of the non-performance of the non-performance of the non-performance of the defect 159,096,753 from 159,096,753 to 128,571,366 from 265,967,817 to 235,442,430 won from the part of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in paragraph (1) of the same Article

The 185,812,109 185, 835, 837, 1737, 223,835, 117 section for exclusive use 10,166, 610, 519, 215 2, 321, 919 13,07,74 in total, 195,978,719 705,05,050, 40,159, 092236,842,861 for the 10-year section for common use after the pre-use inspection.

2. The establishment and scope of the defendant's liability for warranty of defects;

A. The Defendant’s liability for warranty against defects prior to the inspection for the repair of defects is established [1] Defendant’s liability for warranty against defects [the Defendant, around the Plaintiff’s assertion, selected the execution as a method of the execution of the instant sale guarantee contract and newly constructed the instant apartment, thereby substituting the Plaintiff’s liability for warranty against the sectional owners of the instant apartment in the position of project proprietor