1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the defendant makes a supplementary or supplementary decision concerning the matters asserted as the grounds for appeal as follows. Therefore, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance

2. Additional or supplementary judgment

A. The summary of the grounds of appeal 1) The part recognized as non-construction part in the first instance court as non-construction part is not the main structural part of the building, so it is merely a defect that is not a non-construction part. Therefore, since the building of this case has already been completed, there is no compensation for delay thereafter. Among the parts recognized as defects, 839,000 won in the water leakage in the restaurant of the first floor and the mechanical room of the second floor, and the wall leakages in the wall of the first floor and the stairs room of the second floor, 1,735,00 won in the second floor, 769,000 won in the water leakage of the second floor, 735,00 won in the third floor, and 769,000 won in the heat of the third floor outer wall, and 4,110,000 won in the upper floor and the part should be excluded within the scope of the defendant's liability for construction work.

The liquidated damages for delay shall be reduced because the liquidated damages recognized by the first instance court are excessively excessive, in light of the following: (a) the commencement of construction has been delayed for four months due to the delay of the Korea-U.S. Es. Es.T. at the latest; (b) the completion of construction has been postponed on April 30, 2014; (c) the completion of construction has been delayed on June 30, 2014 by mutual consent to the suspension of construction for two months during the same period; and (d) the construction cost due to the es.g., the payment for delay has not been paid properly.

B. 1) As to the assertion regarding non-construction and defects, the part of non-construction recognized by the judgment of the first instance as the defendant's responsibility is merely a part of non-execution.