The plaintiff's claim for 234,087,705 won and damages for delay against the defendant Samsung Construction Co., Ltd.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is the party 1) The plaintiff is the non-Ycheon-gu A Apartment-dong 797 households (hereinafter "the apartment of this case").

In order to manage the apartment of this case, the council of occupants' representatives is the project undertaker who constructed and sold the apartment of this case. 2) The defendant Kusan Construction is the company that executed the new apartment of this case by being awarded a contract for the new construction of the apartment of this case, and the defendant Kusan Construction Mutual Aid Association guarantees the defect repair obligation of the apartment of this case.

B. On October 15, 2012, the Defendant Construction Co., Ltd. entered into a contract for the repair of defects with the Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association and the Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association to enter into a contract for the repair of defects (hereinafter “each of the instant guarantee contracts”) as listed below with the guarantee creditor as the vice-market. Upon obtaining a written report for the repair of defects from the Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association, the Defendant Construction Mutual Aid Association and deposited it with the vice-Mayor, which is the authority for the inspection

Since then, the guarantee creditor of each guarantee contract of this case was changed to the plaintiff.

The guarantee number guarantee amount (unit: unit) C 1 C from September 28, 2012 to September 27, 2013, September 27, 2013, 2012: (i) 1,353,14,270 E from September 28, 2014 to September 27, 2014; (ii) 3 E from September 28, 2012 to September 28, 2015; (iii) 1,082,515,4174F from September 28, 2012 to September 27, 2016; (iv) 81,86,5625 G G G 5 to 28, 2012; (v) 1,97 to 27,97; (v) 8, 2068; (v) 28, 2016;

C. On November 5, 2012, the instant apartment complex was approved for use on or around November 5, 2012. The construction of the instant apartment complex did not construct the part to be constructed in accordance with the design drawing while constructing the instant apartment complex, or the construction of the instant apartment complex was conducted in a way different from the drawing or in a bad manner, and there was a defect such as rupture and water leakage in the common area and the section for exclusive use of the instant apartment complex. The Plaintiff demanded the Defendants to repair the defect several times from July 26, 2013. The sum of the cost of separate defect repair (the revised construction after the approval for use was approved prior to the approval for the original use) (the second three years from the second year