1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the following additional payment order shall be revoked.

1. As to the cited part of the instant case, our court’s reasoning is as follows: (a) add or modify some of its statements; and (b) deducts the Defendants from the allegations added by the court below and the judgment thereon, as stated in paragraph (2), the reasons for this decision are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (c) refer it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The lower court’s judgment of October 21, 2016, which reads “ October 21, 2016,” from the lower court’s eight lower court judgment, as “ October 19, 2016.”

The 11th judgment of the first instance court "(1) / [common] 0.3m less than 0.3m" shall be raised as follows:

“(A) According to the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport’s announcement of the Defendants’ assertion, “Standards for the inspection of defects in multi-family housing, calculation of repair costs, and determination of defects”, etc., the Defendants’ liability should be limited to cases where heat below 0.3 meters has been changed due to functional defects, such as leakage of water or steel corrosion, etc. In addition, since the apartment of this case did not have water leakage or steel corrosion corrosion, it cannot be viewed as defects. Furthermore, even if the heat below 0.3m is considered as defects, concrete is inevitable due to its characteristics in the construction process, and thus, the Defendants’ liability should be limited to 10-15%.

(B) The facts acknowledged prior to the determination are various circumstances revealed in the instant pleadings, namely, ① even if the crack width was less than 0.3 meters at the time of appraisal, the crack width may increase if carbon dioxide or rainwater flows into the frack part due to the characteristics of the seasonal temperature due to the very extreme weather in Korea, and accordingly, it is necessary to repair it as safety and structural problems may arise (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da3939, Jan. 30, 2009); ② even when the frack width was less than 0.3m in the instant pleadings, it may cause corrosion in steel industry by becoming a passage for rainwater's infiltration, and the exposure of concrete outer walls that have fracks to buildings.