1. All of the appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) regarding the principal lawsuit and counterclaim and the principal lawsuit by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding "the result of inquiry into fact-finding on the rates of the court of first instance" to the grounds of recognition of the end of paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Additional Parts] The Plaintiff asserts that, even if 79,442,787 won calculated by subtracting 572,38,237 won from average monthly sales of KRW 651,831,024 in 201 from May 2012 was not recognized as the Plaintiff’s business loss due to the instant defect, the Plaintiff incurred ① the Plaintiff’s work of removing ice, and attaching a processed tape to processed timber after removing ice, and then attaching it to processed wood. As a result, 2,40 won at least 7,382,716,80 won, which was supplied to L. 2,400 won in 2,40 won in 2,570 won in 196, 207, 360 won in 2,570 won in 2,570 won in 2,570 won in 2,560 won in 2,500 won in 19,750 won in 2,57

In addition, it is difficult to view that the amount calculated by multiplying the unit price paid by the Plaintiff to the quantity of reworking due to the instant defect is a loss incurred by the Plaintiff’s business loss as well as the statement of No. 39-1 through No. 6 alone.