1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning Defendant B- Area Housing Association and C shall be modified as follows:

The plaintiff is the defendant.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this part of the underlying facts is as stated in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the first instance, except for the following modifications. Thus, this part of the reasoning is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

An abbreviationd name established in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be used as it is, and it shall not be separately attached by admitting the attached Form of the judgment of the court of first instance.

[Supplementary part] Under the third part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "D" of the 6th judgment shall be added to "Z".

Under the third part of the judgment of the first instance, the first instance court: “Defendant C is a contractor who has newly constructed the instant apartment in the name of “E”; “Defendant C is a contractor who newly constructed the instant apartment in the name of “E”; and on December 26, 2018, comprehensively transferred all rights and obligations with respect to the Defendant C’s above business to the Intervenor succeeding to the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”) (hereinafter “Defendants”).

In the fifth page of the judgment of the first instance, the "Expert L" (hereinafter referred to as "Expert L") in the fifth page of the judgment of the first instance shall be used as "Expert L of the first instance court (hereinafter referred to as "Expert L of the first instance court"), and the "Expert" in the judgment of the first instance, which is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, shall be all "Experts of the first instance court".

2. Determination of the defendants' assertion on the occurrence and scope of defects

A. The facts that were based on the apartment of this case after the sectional owners of the apartment of this case moved into the apartment of this case as seen earlier.

In addition, the defendants' occurrence and scope of defects in relation to the specific individual defects are discussed as follows.

B. The grounds for the court’s explanation as to the Defendants’ assertion that the defect repair in the first and second years was completed are as follows: (a) No. 7 of the judgment of the court of first instance and No. 3 of the judgment.