1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff ordered the Defendant to undertake the interior works of the apartment owned by the Plaintiff, but there was a defect due to the Defendant’s defective construction works.

The plaintiff suffered a total of KRW 20,500,000 from such defective construction works as follows, and the defendant is liable to compensate for the damages.

15 million won for the cost of repair of defective defects

(b) Costs of repairing defects scheduled to be paid three million won;

(c) Residential expenses paid during the period for repairing defects: One million won;

(d) 1.5 million won; and

2. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 1, Gap evidence No. 4, and Eul evidence No. 5 and the whole pleadings, the plaintiff ordered the defendant to complete the tegrative construction work, which was ordered to the defendant, and the plaintiff was awarded a contract for the tegrative construction work again to C (Dtegian) around November 2015, and the plaintiff paid 14.6 million won at the above tegrative construction cost.

However, according to each of the above evidence, C removed bathing rooms in relation to toilets, reconstructed instruments, and other days, and installed it in accordance with branding in relation to the kitchen, and newly installed in accordance with the branding stalk, such as removing the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stalth of the stal

The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge the existence of the Defendant’s existing construction defects, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.