1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the construction of the studio building in Busan Metropolitan City (hereinafter “instant building”) was contracted to D. On July 30, 2010, D entered into a contract with the Defendant to subcontract construction cost of KRW 21,000,000 for construction cost (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

D Around May 2012, the Plaintiff discontinued construction works, and the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the construction cost on May 22, 2012. Since August 2013, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed to perform construction works directly from the Plaintiff and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant agreement”). The Defendant did not perform construction works in accordance with the design drawings and did not cause defects. The Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff damages amounting to KRW 16,954,542 (i.e., partial glass KRW 16,449,271, KRW 505,271) and damages for delay.

2. The witness E’s testimony that seems consistent with the Plaintiff’s assertion is difficult to believe in light of the following circumstances acknowledged by the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 8, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including paper numbers) and the entire purport of oral argument. Other evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone provided the Defendant with the design drawings (Evidence No. 8) other than the written estimate (Evidence No. 2) at the time of the conclusion of the instant construction contract or at the time of the instant agreement.

In light of the above, it is not sufficient to recognize that the Defendant did not execute the construction work according to the design drawing, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for damages of this case is without merit

① The witness E, as the field director of the instant construction work, did not have a design drawing in the event that he saws the Defendant and the Defendant to proceed directly with the instant construction work at the Defendant’s office.

However, at the construction site of this case, the design drawings are kept.