1. Paragraphs 1 and 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim expanded at the trial.

1. The court's explanation on this case is that "the part concerning the damaged part" in the second 16th 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance is "the partial repair of the damaged part", and the part "the decision on the third 3. case" in the third 9 to the sixth 6th 6th , is the same as the part concerning the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal as follows. Thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

A. The Plaintiff’s claim 1) The damages equivalent to KRW 27,76,27 of the cost for repairing defects due to the contamination of the ceiling, etc. caused by the water leakage of this case by the Plaintiff’s assertion, and damages equivalent to KRW 11,50,00 per month due to the Plaintiff’s failure to lease the above building from October 6, 2010. As such, the Defendant is obligated to compensate the Plaintiff for each of the above damages. (ii) The Defendant is obliged to compensate the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to the cost for repairing defects, first of all, as to whether the water leakage of this case occurred due to the defect in the section for common use, Article 6 of the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings (hereinafter “Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings”) provides that the defect is presumed to exist in the section for common use if it is unclear whether the section for common use exists, and thus, it is not reasonable to deem that the defect occurred due to the defect in the construction or the defect in the section for common use.

(2).