2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. 1) On March 17, 2016, the Defendant entered into a construction contract with the Plaintiff’s husband C, a multi-family house (17 households, such as the house, etc. to be occupied by the Defendant; hereinafter “multi-family house in this case”) on the ground of 559.6m2 owned by the Plaintiff’s husband C, Kimhae-si, Kim Jong-si.

2) The instant construction contract was concluded to newly construct the construction contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

(2) The construction period stipulated under the instant construction contract is from March 30, 2016 to August 20, 2016, and the construction price is KRW 661,00,000.

B. The Defendant completed the construction work under the instant construction contract.

On October 28, 2016, approval for use of the multi-family house in this case was made.

C. C Payment of the construction cost shall be KRW 585,00,000,000 among the construction cost of KRW 661,000,000, paid to the Defendant and paid KRW 52,950,000 to the subcontractor.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1, 3, and 10, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the cost of repairing the defects of KRW 14,53,00,00, including the defect repair amount of KRW 9,317,000, and the cost of repairing the defects of KRW 5,236,00, which were incurred from the construction of the floor in the plastic board without using the wall of the wall of the one-story pole in the instant multi-family house, from among the instant multi-family house in which the Plaintiff asserted, was incurred. Since the Plaintiff acquired the damage claim arising from the above erroneous construction from C, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff.

B. The parties to the instant construction contract are not the Plaintiff but C.

Although the Plaintiff asserted to the effect that he acquired the damage claim under the instant construction contract from C, in light of the fact that C claims for the construction cost against C (the Changwon District Court 2017DaDa111881) filed against the Plaintiff for a set-off claim by using the damage claim against C as the automatic claim, it is insufficient to acknowledge the fact of transferring the claim solely based on the written evidence Nos. 11 and 12.