1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On January 7, 2004, the Plaintiff (name D prior to the opening of name) and one other entered into a construction contract with Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant E Co., Ltd.”) with respect to the Housing and New Living Facilities Construction Project on the F of Yangcheon-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant construction project”), with respect to the construction cost of KRW 303,00,000,000, and the construction period from January 5, 2004 to July 5, 2004. The instant construction project was completed on July 5, 2004.

B. At the time of the instant construction contract, Defendant C was the joint representative director of the Defendant Company with G at the time of the instant construction contract, and resigned from the representative director of the Defendant Company on September 27, 201.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence No. 1, Eul evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Defendant C’s judgment on the principal safety defense of Defendant C asserts that the instant lawsuit is illegal against a non-party to the lawsuit, on the grounds that the Plaintiff was not promised to be liable for the costs of repairing defects on September 27, 201, since it was merely one of the joint representative directors at the time of the construction contract as the Defendant Company, and that the Defendant Company retired from the office of the representative director of the Defendant Company as of September 27, 201.

However, the defendant C's above assertion is without merit, since the plaintiff's person asserted as the performance obligor has the standing to be the defendant in the performance suit.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the defect repair was completed by promising the Defendant Company to repair the defect for a period of two years since the completion of the instant construction work, but the defect repair was not completed. Around September 2007, the Defendant Company promised to be liable for the expenses incurred in remodeling works by carrying out a comprehensive remodeling work into KRW 76,00,000. On May 201, 2014, Defendant C would be individually liable to the Plaintiff for the expenses incurred in remodeling works.