1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff filed a claim for a warranty bond against the Defendant, a business entity that newly built and sold Incheon A apartment, in lieu of the defect repair, against the Defendant, and against the Joint Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association of the first instance court that guaranteed the defect repair related to the construction of the apartment of the Pung Industrial Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Construction Mutual Aid Association”). The first instance court received part of the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant, and dismissed the remainder of the claim, while dismissing the claim against the Construction Mutual Aid Association.

Therefore, among the part against the defendant only, the plaintiff applied for an additional appraisal on February 6, 2017 regarding the non-construction of the underground parking lot in lieu of the non-construction defect repair on the upper part of the underground parking lot, in which the plaintiff applied for an alteration of the purport of the claim and the cause of the claim [670,362,491 won [670,362,491 won [651,423,516 won + 218,938,975 won of the cost of the defect repair of the section for exclusive use + the cost of the defect repair of the section for exclusive use + 218,938,975 won] from the first instance court to April 28, 2016]. The result of the appraisal of the defect repair costs (the construction cost of the re-construction and the total costs of extraction and re-construction of the re-construction and re-construction of the whole part of the re-construction costs].

However, since the plaintiff filed an appeal seeking payment of KRW 200 million of the damages claim in lieu of the defect repair in the judgment of the court of first instance against the judgment of the court of first instance as the cost of defect repair for the non-construction of the work of the work of the work of the work of the work of the work of the work of the work of the work of the work, the claim for the

On the other hand, according to the result of the appraisal and supplementary reply on March 6, 2018, the appraiser C calculated the difference in the material cost in the case of the construction of a refeasible set in the apartment of this case and the case of non-construction as KRW 565,572,711.

The appeal has been lodged regarding the matter.