1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On May 31, 2012, the Daesung Foundation (hereinafter “Masung Foundation”) awarded a contract for the construction cost of KRW 351,670,000 for the construction cost to the B Hospital and the C Hospital (hereinafter “Non-Party Company”). Around June 1, 2012, the Non-Party Company subcontracted the said construction to the Plaintiff at KRW 271,437,000 for the construction cost (excluding value-added tax).

B. The non-party company filed a lawsuit against the Daesung Foundation for the payment of the above contract price (U.S. District Court 2013Gahap16308). In the lawsuit above, the Daesung Foundation applied for the appraisal of construction cost, defects, etc., and Defendant A selected as an appraiser on May 15, 2014 (hereinafter “the instant appraisal report”) prepared and submitted an appraisal report that calculated construction cost, reconstruction construction cost, repair cost, and additional construction cost (hereinafter “the instant appraisal report”), and the said lawsuit was subordinate to compulsory conciliation.

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Nonparty Company seeking the payment of the said subcontract price (Seoul Southern District Court 2014Gahap759, Seoul Southern District Court 2015Na14220, hereinafter “relevant lawsuit”). In the relevant lawsuit, the Plaintiff asserted that the costs necessary for the construction, reconstruction, or repair of defects should be deducted from the construction cost. The court of the first instance and the appellate court adopted the instant appraisal report as evidence, and then deducted the construction cost necessary for reconstruction or repair of defects from the construction cost due to the climate of the subcontracted work.

[Ground of recognition] The items of evidence Nos. 1-1, 2, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment

A. The following errors are found in the Plaintiff’s assertion of this case.

In the process of calculating the additional construction cost of PED, etc. executed by the Plaintiff, Defendant A calculated the volume as the Plaintiff’s additional construction work of 237 sets.

However, 1 sets shall be 3.0.