1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a resident of the Ulsan-gu Northern apartment C apartment unit D (hereinafter “instant housing”) and the Defendant is an individual entrepreneur who engages in artificial fishery in the name of “F” in the Northern-gu, Ulsan-gu.

B. On November 10, 2017, the Plaintiff entrusted the Defendant with the design and decoration of the instant housing (hereinafter “instant construction”) and completed the instant construction work around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, 5, 8-1 to 11, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Defendant asserted the cause of the Plaintiff’s claim that the construction of the instant case did not clean the floor of the instant housing, and the construction of the instant housing was carried out by the Defendant at a corner and sponsing the plate at the wind, and there was a defect, such as at a distance between the place of distribution and the place of distribution in the instant remote area and the place of distribution, or the parallel of the place of distribution.

The defendant does not comply with the plaintiff's request for repair of defects, and the above defect can not be just a simple part of repair, and can be improved in whole.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the expenses for reconstruction and reconstruction (the director's expenses 2.31 million won for the housing space rental fee of 7.5 million won for the 3-day reconstruction period) and the damages for delay stated in the purport of the claim against the plaintiff.

3. First of all, according to the images of the evidence Nos. 5 and 8 (including each number), the completion of the instant construction project is somewhat different, such as where there is a gap in parts of the sales market of the instant housing and the distribution studs, etc., as to the defect of the instant construction project, but it is insufficient to recognize it as the defect subject to compensation for damages, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Furthermore, according to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 4, the defendant has an intention to repair the construction work of this case as much as possible.