1. The Defendants jointly and severally liable to the Plaintiff KRW 642,00 and the Defendants B with respect thereto from July 17, 2018; and Defendant C with respect to July 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 30, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant B by setting the contract amount of KRW 77 million (including additional tax) for the civil engineering works for the land D in Ulsan-gun, Ulsan-gun, as the cost of construction for the construction works for the stone construction of structures, the retaining wall, the wall construction works, the access road packing and drainage works, etc. (hereinafter “instant civil engineering works”).

(hereinafter “the contract for the instant civil works”). B.

On February 12, 2016, E, the Plaintiff’s wife, is between Defendant B and Defendant B.

With respect to the construction work of constructing a detached house (hereinafter “instant building”) on the ground of the port land (hereinafter “instant construction work”), a contract was concluded by setting the construction cost of KRW 94.5 million as the construction cost for the instant construction work.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant construction contract”). (c)

E In addition to the instant construction contract, E filed a lawsuit against the Defendants claiming for the repair cost of KRW 36,174,00 incurred in the process of the instant contract for the civil works by Ulsan District Court 2017da663, Ulsan District Court 2017da663, on the ground that not only the instant contract for the construction works but also the instant contract for the civil works is E, but also the said court rendered a judgment dismissing E’s claim by deeming the Plaintiff as not the party to the instant

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s allegation that the defect repair cost incurred in the process of the instant civil works is KRW 36,174,00,000, and the Defendants who performed the instant civil works are jointly and severally liable to pay the said cost to the Plaintiff.

B. The Defendants’ assertion 1) Although F’s representative is Defendant C, F is also an enterprise operated by Defendant B, and Defendant C was not involved in the conclusion of the contract and was also concluded with Defendant B. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim for repair of defects against Defendant C is without merit.