The judgment below

The part against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Daejeon District Court Panel Division.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the reasoning of the lower judgment, the lower court: (a) was awarded a contract on July 2005 with the Plaintiff for a new construction of a wooden sand house with a size of 18 square meters (hereinafter “instant house”); (b) Company B supplied part of the necessary timber from the Plaintiff’s side and newly constructed the instant house; (c) the size of the instant house and the retaining wall’s basic structure was 29 square meters away from H’s boundary at the time of the official housing site, a river site; (d) the Defendant jointly conducted work for gathering earth and rocks from the I TK located 180 meters away from the instant house from April 2008 to December 2, 2009 in order to collect earth and rocks; (e) the Plaintiff was jointly and severally liable for the appraisal and vibration construction of the instant house from the 180 meters away from the construction of the instant house; and (v) the Plaintiff was jointly responsible for the appraisal and vibration construction of the instant house with the characteristics of the wall and the structure structure of the instant house.

Furthermore, with regard to the scope of liability for damages, the court below should find the following circumstances, which are acknowledged in addition to the above facts of recognition, that ① the basic part of the instant house was invaded by the boundary of a river site, must be resolved by the removal of the deprived part, and it is difficult to predict the impact of the instant house in the event that the foundation is damaged, ② the degree of defect of the instant house cannot be readily determined that the repair and repair alone can ensure its safety. ③ Ultimately, the instant house is repaired and repaired.