On July 21, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract for purchase and installation (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the Defendant, with a view to establishing a main household (hereinafter “instant main household”) such as a c building in Gangnam-gu Seoul, and a scambling to be sold by the Defendant in the Jeju-gu, and a D head office, and paying KRW 52,690,000 in return for the aforementioned establishment (hereinafter “instant contract”).

Under the instant contract, the Plaintiff paid KRW 42,152,00 to the Defendant totaling KRW 38,00,000 on July 21, 2017, and KRW 42,152,00 on July 22, 2017, and the Defendant completed the construction of the instant main household around November 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] In light of the overall purport of the argument of appraiser E as to the claim for damages for the determination of the overall purport of the arguments, it is acknowledged that there is a defect in execution, such as Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and there is a defect in construction, and 7,500,000 won is required for the re-installation of the main household of this case established by the defendant.

Unless special circumstances exist, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiff 7,500,000 won and damages for delay in lieu of defect repair.

The defendant asserts that the above defect was exceeded the scope of the defendant's execution, or was caused by the defect of interior works executed by the plaintiff's side, but there is no evidence to regard it as above.

The defendant's assertion is not accepted.

The Plaintiff’s assertion on the determination of the claim for the refund of the purchase price and the Plaintiff’s assertion on it were concluded based on the attached sheet provided by the Defendant, and the contract was concluded after the conclusion of the contract.