1. The plaintiff's appeal and the claim selected by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the court’s determination as to a claim selected by this court, and thus, citing this case’s assertion according to the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. According to the Plaintiff’s assertion under the instant contract, even though the method of inspection of the heading movement of the cler in the instant case is so-called “short-term method,” the Defendant forced to conduct a main testing (second-time inspection) on the day before the date without contract.

Accordingly, since the plaintiff spent 401,50,764 won as a result of the re-inspection (re-inspection) of the re-inspection (re-inspection) in the local factory, the defendant is obligated to compensate the plaintiff for damages equivalent to the above additional costs that the plaintiff paid for the re-inspection (re-inspection) of the re-inspection (re-inspection) due to the tort.

B. As determined earlier, the Plaintiff’s conduct of the main test at the request of the Co., Ltd., a supervising agency, is within the scope of the Plaintiff’s test and inspection as stipulated in the instant contract. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages on a different premise is without merit without further review.

3. If so, all of the plaintiff's claims, including the alternative claims added by this court, shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is justified as it is consistent with this conclusion. Thus, all of the plaintiff's appeal and this court's additional selective claims are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.