1. The Plaintiff’s appeal against the Defendants and the appeal against the Defendant Samsung C&T and the Korea Housing and Urban Guarantee Corporation.

1. The court's explanation of this case is identical to the statement of the first instance court's reasoning, except for the following cases. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary part] The "10-year-end" portion of "10-year-end from September 30, 2008 to September 29, 2019 from September 30, 2008 to September 29, 2019 of the fourth 4th 17th 200 of the judgment of the court of first instance" shall be written "from September 30 to September 29, 2018."

The Court of First Instance No. 16 of the Decision No. 18-19 of the Decision No. 16 of the Court of First Instance "won as a substitute for defect repair" shall be "1,018,881,482 won as a substitute for defect repair."

The term "the insolvency and non-exercise of rights" of the defendant union No. 12, the 17th judgment of the first instance court, is called "the insolvency and non-exercise of rights" of the defendant union.

The existence and scope of the 17th decision of the court of first instance shall be "the existence and scope of the 3rd decision of the court of first instance", "the existence and scope of the 4th decision of subrogation."

2. If so, the judgment of the court of first instance is just in conclusion with the court of first instance, and thus, the Plaintiff’s appeal against the Defendants and the appeal against the Plaintiff Samsung C&T and Defendant Guarantee Corporation are dismissed as it is without merit.