1. The plaintiff's appeal and the defendant's incidental appeal are all dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal and the incidental costs of appeal shall be individually considered.

1. The reasons for this Court regarding this case are as follows: (a) the parties to this case shall be admitted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, on the grounds that the parties to this case shall be excluded from the allegations added or postponed in the appellate court as stated in the following Paragraph 2.

2. Additional determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Fire doors 1) provide that “The fire door subject to performance test shall be composed of even a door and a door mold with a fixed device actually used and a door mold in order to verify whether the fire performance satisfies the statutory standards.” In light of the above, the defect can be deemed to exist in both the door and door mold.

B) The defect in the performance of the fire doors is a serious defect directly connected to the safety and security of the life and property of the resident. However, in light of the fact that it is difficult for the resident to know the existence of the defect before the actual accident occurred, the existence of the defect cannot be restricted by the defendants' liability through the lawsuit. (A) In light of the following circumstances revealed in the argument of this case, i.e., ① the door of the apartment door of this case, in addition to the door of the apartment door of this case, there is no evidence to prove the defect in the apartment door of this case, and ② the door and door of this case were separately manufactured and constructed in accordance with each individual criteria and procedure, so there is no evidence to support that the door door of this case should be replaced in addition to the door of this case, in order to repair the defect existing in the door of this case. (3) KSF2268-1 (in the method of internalization test of the door of this case.