Of the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court below, 44,00,000 won and damages for delay shall be reversed, and this part shall be reversed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The extinctive prescription shall not run from the time when a right has arisen objectively and it is possible to exercise such right, and it shall not run only while such right is unable to be exercised;

The term "non-exercise of a right" means a cause of disability as prescribed by the law in the exercise of a right, for example, in the event that the existence of a right or the possibility of the exercise of a right is not known, and such cause does not constitute a cause of disability as prescribed by the law, even if it was not negligent

(see, e.g., Supreme Court en banc Decision 91Da32053, Mar. 31, 1992). 2. The lower court fully accepted the Plaintiff’s claim as follows. A.

On September 5, 2002, the non-party company received a subcontract for the instant construction work from the Defendant. On the same day, the Plaintiff concluded the instant guarantee agreement between the non-party company and the Defendant as the guarantee creditor to pay the warranty bond.

In the part of the instant construction work executed by the non-party company, the defects of this case occurred. Accordingly, the defendant demanded the plaintiff to perform the guarantee liability under the guarantee contract of this case, and the plaintiff paid the defendant the deposit money of KRW 20,000,000 on July 26, 2004, KRW 20,000 on August 20, 2004, and KRW 21,000,000 on August 16, 2005.

After that, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the non-party company, etc. seeking compensation, and was sentenced to a full winning judgment in the first instance court, but the appellate court was sentenced to a judgment that recognized the repair cost of the non-party company as the repair cost of KRW 14,225,454,00 out of the repair cost of the defect in this case on the ground that a substantial part of the defect in this case cannot be deemed due

B. The Plaintiff, who was not involved in the process of the instant construction, was difficult to reveal the cause of the instant defect, and the Plaintiff filed a claim suit against the Nonparty Company, etc.