1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff’s construction and sale of the Plaintiff’s factory 1) Plaintiff (formerly: Consideration Bosch Rexroth Co., Ltd.) on January 27, 2011, to the Gyeongjin Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Gyeongjin Industry”) on January 27, 201, 1,107-2 factory site 7,708m2 and 1,490.4m2 of a general steel-frame factory under construction on the land (hereinafter “instant factory site and factory building”).

(2) On March 11, 2011, the Plaintiff sold the instant factory at KRW 2.7 billion. (3) On March 24, 2011, the Plaintiff obtained approval for the use of the instant factory, and completed the registration for the transfer of ownership as to the instant factory on March 24, 201.

B. On December 18, 2010, the Defendant’s sales contract (hereinafter “instant contract”) with the terms of selling the sandd position panel (100T on the roof straw, 75T on the wall 75T, W-50 on the wall 10 on the roof straw, and 75T) to the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant contract”).

(2) The instant sandd position panel (hereinafter referred to as the “instant sandd position panel”) in the amount of KRW 52,049,730,000 for the Plaintiff under the agreement.

(2) The Plaintiff constructed the instant plant building using the instant sandd Location Panel.

C. The Gyeongjin Industries and Judgment 1) Claim for Damages (Seoul District Court Decision 201Ga3460, hereinafter “Prior Case”) against the Plaintiff by asserting that “The Plaintiff bears the warranty liability for the defect in the construction of the factory of this case, because there is any defect in the construction of the factory of this case.”

B. The defendant filed a lawsuit, and the defendant participated in the preceding case for the plaintiff.

On November 1, 2012, “In comparison with design drawings, specifications, etc., the instant factory buildings include various optional construction and non-construction parts, such as the sandbrid position panel fails to meet the dive performance standards set forth in the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, and include a total of KRW 200,160,000, including the cost of repair of the sandbd position panel.

The plaintiff on the ground that "....."