1. Plaintiff’s promotion enterprise’s KRW 491,747,139 among lawsuits against Defendant Promotion enterprise and its related thereto.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an autonomous management body consisting of sectional owners in order to manage one building A, 522 households, and ancillary facilities (hereinafter “instant condominium buildings”) of the Yongsan-gu Seoul Metropolitan City.

Defendant Kim G&C is a business entity that constructed and sold the instant aggregate building, and Defendant Kim G&C is a company that constructed the instant aggregate building by being awarded a contract for a new construction of the instant aggregate building from Defendant KimWn.

The defendant's Seoul Guarantee Insurance is a guarantee company that issues a defect repair insurance policy on the new construction of the apartment in this case for the defendant's promotion company.

B. As to the instant aggregate building and the Defendant Seoul Guarantee Insurance and the instant aggregate building, the Defendant Promotion Company entered into a contract for the warranty of defects (hereinafter “instant guarantee contract”) with the period of coverage of KRW 1,574,276,880, and the period of coverage from April 5, 2012 to April 4, 2017.

C. The Defendant Promotion Company had undergone a pre-use inspection on April 5, 2012 on the instant aggregate building, and the Plaintiff, an autonomous management organization of the instant aggregate building, was established on February 1, 2014, succeeded to the Plaintiff’s right under the instant guarantee agreement.

The defendant promotion company did not construct the part to be constructed in accordance with the design drawing regarding the aggregate building of this case or constructed it differently from the defective construction or design drawing.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff, at the request of the sectional owners of the instant aggregate building or through the head of the management office of the instant aggregate building, continuously requested the Defendant’s promotion company to repair defects, and the Defendant’s promotion company also implemented repair works for some defects, but there still remains any defects such as the statement of repair expense calculation by item of the attached Table 1 in the instant aggregate building (hereinafter “each defects”).

The remuneration shall be based on the same amount as that stated below, on the premise that the repair of the outer wall rupture is the partial rupture after repairing it.