1. The plaintiff's appeal and the plaintiff's claim expanded by this court are all dismissed.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant is a person engaged in hanok, cultural heritage repair, etc. under the trade name of “C”.

B. In the event that a part of the left side of the Korea-style Buildings in the Gyeongbuk-gun, the Plaintiff used as the Dop Dop Dop Dop, D (hereinafter “instant building”) was destroyed, and the building was remarkably damaged to the port, the Plaintiff’s execution of the construction of replacing the Dop construction of the instant building and the damaged parts and replacing the flag (hereinafter “instant construction”).

C. From April 18, 2015, from April 21, 2015, the instant construction

4. Flag and removal until 22. From April 22, 2015

4. Removal of roof yellow sand from April 23, 2015 to May 7, 2015, roof construction (mar and rafting installation) from May 9, 2015, roof construction (mar and rafting installation), roof construction on May 13, 2015, roof construction (maring construction) on May 14, 2015, roof construction (mar and mar house construction) on May 14, 2015, roof construction (marry and mar house construction), roof construction on May 19, 2015, roof construction (spat maintenance and mar construction), roof construction on May 19, 2015, roof construction (stetop) on May 19, 2015, and May 21, 2015 to May 21, 2015.

5. Until 25.25, it was carried out at the stage of roof construction (construction).

The building of this case was collapsed on May 28, 2015, after the roof construction (building) was completed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 4 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the ground of the Plaintiff’s claim

A. On April 11, 2015, the Plaintiff contracted the instant construction to the Defendant on or around April 11, 2015, and the Defendant has a contractual obligation to complete the repair of the instant building safely in accordance with the contract.

Nevertheless, as the defendant collapsed the building of this case due to defective construction, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused by the non-performance of obligation under the contract.

Meanwhile, the amount of damages is 40,013,080 won and solatium 60,000 won.

(No. 1) As to the instant construction work between the Plaintiff and the Defendant.