1. The part against Defendant B in the judgment of the court of first instance, which exceeds the following amount ordered to be paid.

1. The reasons why this Court is stated in this part of the underlying facts are the same as the entries in the part “1. Basic Facts” from Chapter 5 to Chapter 5 of the first instance judgment, except for the following parts. As such, it shall be cited by including the abbreviation in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Part 7 of the judgment of the first instance court, "A 1" shall be written with "A 1, B, and B 2".

2. Summary of parties' arguments;

A. As to the claim for return of advance payment to Defendant B and damages in lieu of defect repair, the gist of the Plaintiff’s claim 1) as to the cause of claim is indicated in this part of the judgment of the court of first instance. The ground to be indicated in this part is that the court of first instance from No. 7 to No. 8 to

2.(a)

1) Paragraph 2) is the same as each description, and thus, it is citing the summary of the appellate court’s additional assertion (1) 49,620,00 won of the appraisal value of materials assessed by the appraiser H of the first instance trial as appraiser H of the first instance trial is calculated without objective evidence as to whether it is a material that actually or is premised on an actual input at the site, and the burden of proof as to whether it is a material exists is unjust in that the defendant B bears the burden of proof.

(2) In the absence of a trace of the progress of the other project by the appraiser H of the first instance trial, Defendant B recognized the rate of the height of the other project as 30%, and it appears that the amount of the completed portion was overlapping by calculating the material source amount.

(3) As appraiser H of the first instance trial changed the amount of KRW 2,92,00 from the appellate court to “no details” as to the wall construction among the first floor construction through the fact-finding reply from October 8, 2018, it should be excluded from the amount of the base value.

2) Defendant B’s appellate court’s additional assertion A) The Plaintiff attempted to deceiving the court to make an excessive claim for the construction cost of the instant case, etc. and to acquire pecuniary gains by deceiving the court. This point is based on the total construction cost.