1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against A in bankruptcy shall be dismissed;

2. The plaintiff, .

1. Presumed factual basis

A. The Plaintiff ordered the instant apartment construction work (civil engineering facilities, civil engineering, construction, and machinery) to the project proprietor of the same soil (hereinafter referred to as “the instant apartment”), the same soil (hereinafter referred to as “the same soil”) and the Defendant Sam-gu Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Seoul”) as the project proprietor of the 6-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong 480.

The defendant Postal Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Co., Ltd.") was appointed as a trustee in bankruptcy as seen below, and the defendant Postal Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Co., Ltd.") has jointly and severally guaranteed the same soil and the above contract obligations of the defendant chan and entered into a warranty contract for each defect liability period.

The Plaintiff awarded a contract for the instant apartment bath construction to Defendant ELS Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “ELS”).

The Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the "Seoul Guarantee Insurance Co., Ltd") concluded a warranty insurance contract with Defendant LELS.

B. Approval for use of the instant apartment was made on September 7, 2001.

C. Due to the non-construction, modified construction, and defective construction of construction works such as the same soil, there were defects such as ruptures in the apartment of this case.

The council of occupants' representatives of the apartment of this case filed a lawsuit against the plaintiff seeking damages in lieu of defect repair by taking over the damage claim from 184 households among sectional owners who did not completely repair the defect.

(1) The first instance court: Suwon District Court Decision 2009Gahap10368 decided Apr. 20, 201; the appellate court: Seoul High Court Decision 201Na3683 decided Nov. 30, 201; Supreme Court Decision 2011Na3683 decided Dec. 22, 2011; hereinafter “first instance case”). During the first instance trial of the preceding case, the Plaintiff notified the same case to the same.

(2) d December 30, 209.

The plaintiff is an apartment of this case according to the final judgment of the preceding case.