1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition as follows, and thus, this case is cited in accordance with the main sentence of

【추가하는 부분】 ▣ 제1심판결 6쪽 4행 다음에 아래와 같이 추가한다.

『원고는 쪼개기 공사에 대비하여 공사 완료 시점까지 벽을 설치하지 않았다면 준공검사를 받을 수 없었을 것이라고 주장하나, 준공검사를 받았다는 사정만으로는 장차 출입문을 설치할 부분까지 벽을 설치하였다고 단정하기 어렵고, 갑 제4호증의 1 내지 12의 각 기재만으로는 위와 같은 원고 주장 및 위 인정금액을 초과하여 공사비가 지출되었다는 점을 인정하기에 부족하고 달리 이를 인정할 증거가 없다. 원고의 위 주장은 받아들이지 않는다.』 ▣ 제1심판결 7쪽 3행 다음에 아래와 같이 추가한다.

As to this, the plaintiff asserts that the change of the entrance door from the automatic door to the manual was caused by the lack of the entrance width, ② the change of remote areas and floor materials from the second and fourth floors according to the agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant, ③ the interior of the first and fourth commercial building is required to be the lessee, and it was not included in the construction contract of this case. Therefore, the plaintiff asserts that ① the defect repair cost of 410,000 won, ② the defect repair cost of 3,610,000 won, ③ the defect repair cost of 31,590,000 won cannot be recognized.

(1) According to the health stand and evidence evidence No. 5, it is acknowledged that the Plaintiff agreed to set up the first floor door automatically as the matters stipulated in a special contract for a construction project. The Plaintiff’s assertion alone cannot be deemed as not responsible for the Plaintiff’s construction project with respect to the foregoing modified construction project. Thus, this part constitutes a defect.

Plaintiff

The argument is without merit.

(2) With respect to paragraph (1) A, only the statement of No. 12 shall be made in the remote area and floor in the household of the plaintiff and the defendant.