1. The Defendant: (a) KRW 7,632,534 on the Plaintiff and KRW 6% per annum from August 22, 2014 to October 27, 2016 on the Plaintiff.

The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the evidence Nos. 1 through 6, Eul evidence Nos. 1-1 to 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1-1 to 7 (including additional numbers), the witness C's testimony, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of this court's request for appraisal by the appraiser C.

On September 18, 2012, the Plaintiff awarded a contract to the Defendant for construction of a new building at KRW 45 million.

After the completion of the remaining payment period, the registration of ownership preservation was agreed on March 29, 2013, and the registration of ownership preservation was made on March 29, 2013.

The Plaintiff was paid KRW 380,000,000,000 from the Defendant.

There are various defects such as the installation of the 1st floor, the outer wall mar, the 1st floor, the installation of the toilet for the 1st floor, and the installation of shower rooms for the 2nd floor.

The amount required for the repair of total defects is 18,352,926 won.

Since the plaintiff decided to construct a 1,000,000 won from the construction cost, the plaintiff and the defendant decided to deduct the 1,000,000 won from the construction cost.

In addition, the temporary electricity fee of KRW 110,430 was deducted from the construction cost.

As part of the defect repair cost of KRW 18,352,92,926, an appraiser calculated the cost of repair outside the building as KRW 4,998,767 (MaB). The defendant asserts that the amount is more than KRW 13 million, but it is insufficient to recognize the defendant's assertion only by the descriptions in subparagraphs 8-1 and 2 of the evidence Nos. 8-1 and 2, and there is no other proof of the defendant.

Although the plaintiff did not agree to grant six eyebrows and 23 locations of snowbrows outside the building, the plaintiff should not deduct the above amount, and the above facts of recognition are denied, there is no counter-proof by the plaintiff who can reverse the fact-finding.

The defendant asserts that the plaintiff and the defendant agreed to deduct the 280,000 won of the repair cost for the poor repair of the third floor room, and the 1,627,000 won of the Plaintiff's brokerage office installation cost from the construction cost.