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

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, in addition to the following dismissals or additions, and therefore, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2.Nos. 16 to 18 of the judgment of the court of first instance that is dismissed or added are as follows:

1) As a result of the appraiser A’s appraisal of the sum of defect repair costs, comprehensively taking account of the entire purport of the pleadings as a result of the fact-finding conducted by this court against the appraiser A, the building of this case can be acknowledged as having any defects such as the entries in the summary sheet by the annexed list of defects, and the sum of the defect repair costs is KRW 979,047,882 (the sum of the defect repair costs in the judgment of the first instance judgment / [11] The sum of the defect repair costs due to the non-refluent payment of pipes

(2) The defendant's assertion on the calculation of the cost of repairing defects) / [1] The defendant's defect repair cost should be calculated by the full re-construction in consideration of the safety construction order of the steel frame, since the difference and color of the inner substitute thickness of the floor and the re-construction of the part outside the floor representing the floor is different not only from the location of the occurrence but also from the dynamic characteristics of the construction process, such as the material of the construction process, the front reconstruction is inevitable, and in particular, the defect in the construction technology attached to the wall representing the wall cannot be considered as the form of the board removal.

In other words, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged as a comprehensive consideration of the overall purport of the pleadings as a result of the appraiser A’s appraisal, include ① the color, damage, etc. of the floor substitute stones and wall studs, not all tins, but only some substitute stones, and ② the defect repair cost of this part is not defective.