1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the first instance are as follows, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the assertion that the defendant emphasizes or adds in the trial of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The defendant's assertion that the result of the appraisal by the appraiser F of the first instance trial is omitted from the appraisal of the significant and apparent defects existing in the construction of this case as shown in the following table, and that the appraisal amount for some defects calculated in the above appraisal result is less and more unfair, so the defendant is liable to pay the construction price at the same time as receiving damages in lieu of the defect repair from the plaintiff.

The defendant's defect in each 1 G to H Dong 1 G, J, K Tho Lake 2 at the intervals of the light-weights of each 2 subparagraphs of each 2 subparagraph of each 3 Dong-dong 3 at the gap, the defect in the inside of each 3 L-dong 4 L-dong 1, the defect in the inside of each 3 gale height of each 3 Dong-dong 4 L-dong 1, the defect in the inside of each 5 light-weight wall and the defect in the installation of soundproofs

B. Determination 1) The Defendant stated only the remainder other than the above matters at the time of the application for appraisal in the first instance trial as the appraisal. If the defect is serious or apparent as so alleged, there is no special circumstance to state only the “other matters” in the application for appraisal. There is no evidence to deem that the appraised amount calculated as a result of the above appraisal is contrary to the empirical rule or unreasonable. 2) In light of the following circumstances, the evidence submitted by the Defendant alone is insufficient to acknowledge that there exists a defect as above in the construction of this case, and there is no evidence to prove otherwise.

In addition, the toilets alleged by the defendant through the application for resumption of pleadings are used.