1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. On November 17, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into a Rotterdam construction contract with Defendant C, who is the representative of Defendant B, and the Plaintiff’s residence. The Plaintiff suffered enormous defects in the part executed by the Defendants.

Therefore, the Defendants are liable for compensating for damages arising therefrom. If the Plaintiff is not a party to the contract, the Plaintiff is a resident living in the foregoing housing and suffers from mental suffering due to defective construction works, so the Defendants are liable for paying consolation money.

2. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Gap evidence No. 1-1-1, it is acknowledged that Eul, the husband of the plaintiff, entered into a contract for artificial insemination with defendant C on November 17, 2016, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that any contract has been concluded between the plaintiff and the defendants.

[Plaintiff asserts to the effect that only one of the husbands of the above construction contract belongs to E, and the Plaintiff is the actual contractual party. However, there are no circumstances to see it. This is true in light of the fact that E claims against the Defendants the same defect and claims damages (this Court Decision 2017Da518938). Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion seeking compensation for damages due to defects on the premise that the Plaintiff falls under the subcontractor is a contractor is without merit.

In addition, the evidence submitted in this case alone does not recognize the circumstance that the plaintiff suffered special mental suffering which the plaintiff should pay in money, in addition to seeking compensation for damages caused by defects of the contractor E.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion on this is without merit.

3. All of the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.