1.The following amounts, among the parts against the principal suit of the judgment of the court of first instance, exceed the amount ordered to be paid:

1. Determination on the grounds for appeal

A. The defendant argues that it is the same as the first instance court, and argues that the first instance court, as a reason for appeal, cannot recognize the items as additional construction works, and that the defendant's counterclaim should be cited.

B. As long as the appraisal method, etc. is against the rule of experience or unreasonable, the result of the appraisal by the judgment appraiser must be respected unless there exist significant errors.

In addition, even if there is an error in part of the appraisal result of the appraiser, if the appraisal result of the appraisal result is not contradictory or very obscure as a whole, the court shall not reject the whole appraisal result, but shall reject only the corresponding part, and may adopt and use the remainder as evidence.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da84608 Decided January 12, 2012). In light of the aforementioned legal principles and the evidence submitted in the first instance court; evidence submitted by the Defendant in the trial; evidence submitted in the trial; evidence submitted by the appraiser D in the trial; and fact-finding with respect to the Korea-trial Corporation, the first instance court’s judgment is justifiable in lieu of the fact-finding; however, the part that recognized the “construction work for septic tanks” as additional construction; and the part that recognized the material cost for steel products among additional construction costs is unreasonable; thus, the part that recognized the “construction work for septic tanks” as additional construction works and that

2. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, since it does not change the contents of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in the part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, it shall be accepted by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

After the last 3rd conduct, the Plaintiff is obliged to compensate the Defendant for damages incurred by the defect repair or defects in the construction of this case, as the defects occurred in the construction of this case. The details of the fifth 5-6 conduct are as follows.