1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Basic facts were changed to the current trade name on October 18, 2010 when the defendant was a corporation established for the purpose of building construction business, etc., which was the original trade name of a limited company.

On June 30, 2006, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for each of the two-year warranty period from July 11, 2006 to September 30, 2006 (hereinafter “instant contract”). As to the new construction of a Class B factory (hereinafter “instant factory”), the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant for each of the two-year warranty period (hereinafter “instant contract”).

The defendant completed the construction in accordance with the contract of this case. The completion date of the factory of this case is June 8, 2007.

On the other hand, with respect to the construction of external walls of the sandd Location Panel, the factory of this case must be constructed outside by the upper panel of the sandd position outer wall, but there is a defect that the upper panel has been constructed with the inside of the lower panel (hereinafter “the defect of this case”), and the 65,843,510 won is spent for the repair of defects.

On August 12, 2013, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that “The factory of this case was completed on June 8, 2007, and there was a fact that the factory of this case was enjoyed from the year concerned, and was engaged in the temporary installment repair only every year, and that the Defendant’s D merely repeats the equipment from the container every year, while accompanied by a specialized business operator, dismantled all the teams, and again demands compensation for damages because it is required to perform the external construction to the new team.” On August 20, 2013, the Plaintiff again sent to the Defendant a certificate of content that “The Defendant was capable of leakage at the time of the plant of this case every year, according to the overall external team of the factory of this case, and it is difficult to restore the original defect because the Defendant’s D only repeats the equipment from the soft container every year.”

On August 27, 2013, the defendant guaranteed the plaintiff to "the plaintiff on August 27, 2013, and the period of warranty expired September 28, 2008, and even if the tax invoice is calculated based on the tax invoice, October 208.