1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant Samdo Housing Co., Ltd.: (a) KRW 1,173,080,886 and its amount from August 13, 2014.

A. This part of the defect is likely to be repaired by means of reconstruction after the removal of the other.

The Defendants’ assertion in this part is without merit. (d) The Defendants asserted that the scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic scopic s.

As shown in the above argument by the Defendants, the evidence results of the fact-finding on the commercial Convention engineering architectural firms in this Court.

However, as a result of the appraiser A's appraisal of defects, the following circumstances revealed by considering the results of the appraiser A's appraisal of this court's appraisal of the appraiser A as of July 14, 2014, and the results of each appraisal request as of November 18, 201 of the same year, i.e., "stoppy (stoppy, L-25*25*4)" in the siren part of the underground parking lot siren among the completion drawings.

The defendants' assertion in this part is without merit.

F) The construction method of a horizontal Roof-ro project on the main rooftop is defective and the distance of support is misconstruction [Public 251.