1. The Defendant’s KRW 1,200,000,000 as well as 6% per annum from August 18, 2014 to October 19, 2017 to the Plaintiff.

Basic Facts

The Defendant is a project implementer of the Articles of Incorporation, Busan-gun, Busan-gun, the articles of incorporation of the Plaintiff-gun, and the Plaintiff entered into a contract for the occupancy of the area 2, 3, and 4 (hereinafter “instant land”) among the Busan-gun and the above industrial complex on January 23, 2013, and entered into a contract for the purchase of the instant land with the Defendant on February 6, 2013, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 20, 2013.

On August 18, 2014, an accident (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”) in which a reinforced earth retaining wall located on the instant land (hereinafter referred to as “instant retaining wall”) collapseed (hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”).

In order to restore the retaining wall of this case due to the instant accident, the Plaintiff entered into a construction contract with the construction company of 153 billion won (hereinafter “instant construction contract”) around February 2016. On March 8, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into an additional contract with the construction company of 153 billion won for the instant construction contract (hereinafter “instant additional construction contract”). Under each of the above contracts, the Plaintiff entered into an implementation of restoration work (hereinafter “instant restoration work”) to remove part of the retaining wall of this case, two parts, and three parts and three parts of the retaining wall of this case and install the retaining wall of this case (hereinafter “instant restoration work”).

【The Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no dispute over the ground of recognition, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 5, 41, 42, and 48 (including serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul’s evidence Nos. 2, 16, Eul’s evidence Nos. 2, 16, Eul’s evidence Nos. 2, 13, and 14, and the purport of the whole pleadings was caused by defects in the design and construction of the industrial complex of this case. Thus, the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages due to nonperformance or tort, liability for warranty, and liability for the restoration of retaining wall of this case incurred by the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 44(1) of the Framework Act on the Construction Industry.