1. Of the part concerning the counterclaim in the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 421,52,759 against the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. The judgment prior to the remanding the scope of the judgment in this Court accepted the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of the unpaid construction cost (the claim was dismissed as a result of the Defendant’s assertion on the deduction), and partly accepted the Defendant’s claim for damages in lieu of defect repairs during the Defendant’s counterclaim, and all of the claims for damages equivalent to the rent added through incidental appeal (758,763,582 won and damages for delay) from the trial prior to the remand among the Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of additional construction cost and the Defendant’s counterclaim.

As to this, both the Plaintiff and the Defendant filed an appeal against all of their lost parts, and the judgment of remand only reversed and remanded the part concerning the claim for payment of the principal lawsuit prior to the remand and the part concerning the claim for compensation in lieu of defect repair among the counterclaim claims, and all of the remaining appeals of the Plaintiff and the Defendant were dismissed. As such, the part concerning the claim for additional construction cost and the claim for damages equivalent to the rent among the counterclaim claims in the judgment prior to the remand are determined by the remand judgment and excluded from the scope of

2. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the pertinent part of the grounds for the judgment of the first instance (from the last day of the judgment of the second instance to the sixth one), and thus, citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. According to the facts of recognition as above, the defendant is obligated to pay the unpaid construction cost to the plaintiff 465,000,000 won, barring special circumstances.

4. Determination as to the claim for mutual aid and counterclaim based on the defendant's right to repair defects

A. The defendant's main point of argument is that 1,466,608,585 won is required to pay the repair cost due to defective defects in the building of this case due to the plaintiff's non-construction, modified construction, or erroneous construction. The additional engine pumps construction cost is required.