1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 12,730,374 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and its related amount from October 21, 2016 to September 14, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff was an owner of three-storys housing (1st floor, 83.30 square meters, 222 square meters, 33.50 square meters, 23.50 square meters, hereinafter referred to as the “instant building”) in the brick sloping roof in Busan-gu, Busan-gu.

B. On June 2, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to conclude a contract for the construction project to remodel the first floor of the instant building into a commercial building (hereinafter “instant construction project”) (hereinafter “instant construction contract”).

C. The instant construction was suspended on July 25, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Uncontentious Facts, Entry B in Evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of the principal claim

A. The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the results of the expert witness Gap evidence No. 2 and the results of the expert witness D (hereinafter referred to as "expert")'s appraisal on January 2, 2017.

1) The floor, walls, and the ceiling of the instant building generated ruptures and water leakages, and the order in which ruptures and water leakages occurred is as follows. ① Removal of a lighting wall ② Displacement of opening or closing the ruptures (i.e., initial subsidences) ③ ruptures (i., additional installation of a H beam 150 meters mn beam), ④ the Defendant continued to install a rupture, ruptures of the instant building, ruptures of the wall, and ruptures and water leakages of the ceiling at the time of the instant construction. In full view of the following, the Defendant excessively removed a lighting wall at the time of the instant construction, and the Defendant partially removed the above lighting wall that partially cut back the lower part of the upper structure, resulting in a large number of cracks and ruptures because it was not properly supported by the lower part of the upper structure.

3. On the instant building, there were defects such as the crack of the wall, the defect of the opening or closing of the wall, the 2nd floor slives of the second floor, the water leakage and mast pollution, etc., and the defect repair expenses necessary to repair the said defects are the sum of KRW 8,331,167, as shown in the attached Table 1 summary table.

B. According to the above facts, the defendant is against the plaintiff.