1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Plaintiff

A. Defendant Hyundai Construction Co., Ltd. is 1,552,713.

1. The reasoning of this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except where the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is written as follows. Thus, this part of the judgment is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

After the pre-use inspection of the previous portion of the defect repair expenses (unauthorized construction / modified construction), the first instance court of the 316,51,155 for the 10-year 10-year 5-year 10-year 5-year 10-year 5-year 10-year 10-year 387,461,109-year 387,461,109-year 109-year 28,251,587-year 28,587-year 3-year 10-year 5-year 10-year 10

256,529,913 111,039, and 53,834,850 won, which are the sum of 57,204,449 won and 57,850 won and 53,834,850 won, which have been additionally appraised by the first instance court.

900,789 5,243,323 642,071 690,906,550 common areas 527,604,956 150,074,52219,562,562,141,77,767,979 214,171,586 161,006,91414,430,18,098 844,156,1114,604,604, 6310,601,4350,601,4401,6401,68,668,219,414,909,61648,1212,984,684,646,65,6846,65,654,684,65,664,

5) Paragraph 2 of L/C shall be as follows. “The percentage of the entire area of the transferred household of this case to the entire area of the apartment of this case shall be 97.44% (119,082.75 square meters / 122,206.97 square meters / 122,206.97 square meters; hereinafter referred to as two decimal places). The amount of damages incurred by the defective portion of the transferred household of this case due to the defective portion of this case is KRW 690,906,50, total amount of damages caused by the defect of the entire part of this case, as seen earlier, KRW 676,708,810, excluding the total amount of remuneration for the non-transfer household of this case as shown in attached Form 2, 14,197,740 won.

- 5 pages [The basis for recognition is to add “the results of the additional appraisal and the results of the request for supplementation of the appraiser in the trial” to “the results of the supplementary appraisal.”

2. The grounds for the judgment on this part concerning the parties’ assertion on the occurrence and scope of each of the instant defects are as follows: (a) of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, the grounds for the judgment are to delete paragraphs (a), (c), (i) and (ii) of Paragraph (2).