The plaintiff's defendant A&C Co., Ltd., Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd., and machinery construction mutual aid association.

(b) Nothing in this part is a defect.

- Unless there is a separate instruction with regard to the unclaimed construction of walls in the inspection room, it is reasonable to view that Defendant A&C as Defendant A&D is capable of handling the walls in the inspection room as soon as possible in accordance with ordinary construction methods, such as construction work standard specifications and specifications, and that the primary bridge should be constructed so as to keep the unfolded condition with other spaces.

However, according to the results of the on-site investigation by the appraiser, the face disposal of the wall in the inspection room seems to be considerably inferior, and the primary penalty still remains after construction.

An appraiser determined this part of the article as a defect for the foregoing reasons. It is difficult to deem that there is a significant error in the judgment of the appraiser's defect.

Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendants cannot be accepted.

[Public 9-10] Changes in the planting and Quantity of Landscapes - 6 weeks in completion drawings (H5*R20) and lurgic trees (H3.5*R12) in relation to the part ordered to depth 6 weeks in the completion drawings, and the actual planting of trees falls short of the above instructions, and the expenses incurred in planting the trees were calculated as the repair cost for the said defects.

However, in the case of falling short of the standards, the difference shall be calculated as the repair cost by comparing the trees currently constructed and the trees of the completion drawing.

Therefore, the repair cost for this part of the defect must be re-determined as above.

- In view of the fact that planting of trees and their quantity are different from the drawing according to the Plaintiff’s request or on-site conditions, and that it is impossible to pass a pre-use inspection unless planting and landscaping are completed to a certain extent, it cannot be readily concluded that the above trees were planted due to the Defendants’ fault in the construction, solely on the ground that shot tree (H1.0*W0.3) and 80 revolving 30 stock prices (H0.3*W0.3) were not planted.

Therefore, the parts of the above trees are not defective.