1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance other than the following, and thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

(a) It shall be replaced with the lower table at the third bottom of the judgment of the first instance;

[The total amount of pre-use inspection of common areas and the total amount of the pre-use inspection shall be reduced to the above amount, as the number of KRW 146,96,309 of the item 36. Underground floor, 36, 96, and 309 of the attached Table 197, 468, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 9646, 97, 97, 966, 97, 97, 97, 966, 97, 97, 97, 966, 146, 97, 97, 97, 97, 97, 146, 146, 97, 97, 164, 166, 97, 97, 196, 197, 197, 1965, 1975, 1967

(b) Court rulings of the first instance shall be not more than five pages; and

Part of the port of appeal (from No. 12 to No. 8 of the first instance judgment) is as follows.

In principle, the issue of whether there was a defect in the plaintiff's assertion on the main apartment of "B. A., a partial alteration construction supervision over the passage of the underground floor and the drainage crossing (No. 36) (A. the party's assertion) should be determined based on the construction completion drawings. However, the construction completion specifications concerning the apartment of this case, even though the construction of the apartment of this case was ordered to construct the apartment of this case as the main steel pipe, it constitutes a defect. (B) The defendant's argument that the apartment of this case was designed to construct the underground floor drainage crossing with the high strength PVC from the starting date of the construction, and accordingly, it was actually constructed as the high intensity PVC pipe.