1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

In light of the fact that alleys were feld, the reason why the framework of the hanok in this case was feld seems to have been executed with heavy felites without the consent of the defendant.

C) Therefore, in full view of the purport of the arguments in the entirety of the arguments as to the claim for damages equivalent to the cost of the basic repair of the instant hanok incurred from the Plaintiff’s use of it, the cost of the Han River and the cost of the removal of Han River and the cost of the defect repair in the attached Table 6), and the cost of the defect repair in the attached Table 7, there is no reason to further examine it. 2) The Defendant’s defective construction of the aggregate of the evidence in the first instance court’s appraisal 3*C 5m of the defect repair in the upper part [Attachment 2] the defect that is separated from the upper part of the 3*C 5m of the defect repair [30m. 7m. 20, the defect repair cost of the instant hanok 9m. 5m. 20, the defect repair cost of the 3m of the instant hanok 5m of the ground [the defect repair in the attached Table 3], the defect repair cost of the 1*A-D 200, the defect repair cost of the 200m of the wooden column 30.

3) It is insufficient to recognize that only the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff on the claim for damages related to the defect of materials is due to the defect of timber used by the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the damage was caused by the defect of timber used by the Plaintiff.

Rather, it is true.