1. The following amounts among the parts against Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association with the judgment of the court of first instance:

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance in addition to the fact that "19 Dong 1903 households" in the 4th sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance is "19 Dong 1803 households". Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination on the claim against Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association

A. According to the facts of recognition as above, A and C entered into the instant construction guarantee contract with Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association and received the instant construction guarantee contract and submitted it to the Plaintiff. Despite the Plaintiff’s request for the repair of defects, the Plaintiff did not complete the repair of defects. Thus, Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association is a guarantor who guaranteed A and C’s liability for the repair of defects under the instant construction contract, barring any special circumstance, and is obligated to pay an amount equivalent to the compensation for damages equivalent to the defect repair guaranteed by the said contractor within the scope of the guaranteed amount for defects after the inspection of defects arising from the instant apartment pursuant to the construction guarantee contract

[The plaintiff claimed for the payment of the total amount of the construction contract of this case (342,55,646 won and damages for delay) from among the money repaid as compensation for damages according to the final judgment of the previous lawsuit, but the scope of defects for which the defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association bears the responsibility to guarantee is determined as defects after the pre-use inspection. Thus, the part on the damages for the pre-use inspection of the plaintiff's assertion is without merit).

(1) This Court's assertion about the defenses and ruptures of extinctive prescription by Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association (1) and the content to be explained on this part by this Court, in addition to the addition of the following after the 5th following the 18th of the first instance judgment, the corresponding part of the reasoning of the first instance judgment is 17th of the said judgment.