1. The contract between the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is Korea as of March 14, 201.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. On March 10, 2014, the Plaintiff Co., Ltd. registered the Plaintiff’s basic facts with the UNC on March 10, 2014.

On March 14, 2011, the Defendant (only hereinafter “Defendant”) and the Counterclaim Plaintiff (only hereinafter “Defendant”) concluded a construction contract with respect to the construction work of the board (hereinafter “instant board construction work”) among the new construction work of the Korea Nandong Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant physical distribution center”) that the Defendant contracted to enter into a construction contract with the construction cost of KRW 968 million from March 14, 2011 to April 30, 201.

The Yangsan City approved the use of the logistics center of this case on August 10, 2011.

After the above approval for use, the defendant requested the plaintiff to repair the defects since it was the water leakage and water height on the roof of the logistics center of this case, and the plaintiff refused the repair of defects. The plaintiff did not occur due to the water leakage and water height construction of this case, and rejected the repair of defects.

On January 2, 2013, the Defendant concluded a defect repair construction contract with the Mangjin Industry Co., Ltd. and the construction cost of KRW 24.2 million on January 2, 2013, and on May 2, 2013, the Defendant concluded a defect repair construction contract with the Geumyang L&C Co., Ltd. with the construction cost of KRW 27.5 million.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 2 and Eul evidence 2 and 3 (including paper numbers), the fact inquiry results of this court's mass production, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) The plaintiff's assertion (1) The plaintiff's assertion is not due to the defects of the team construction of this case, but due to the steel frame of the logistics center of this case, and the team fixed in the steel frame has been placed under the lower part. Thus, the plaintiff has no obligation to compensate the defendant for damages in lieu of defect repair.

(2) The defendant's assertion is due to the defects in the panel construction of this case, on the roof of the logistics center of this case.