1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of the lawsuit, including costs incurred by participation, are all assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is a party 1) The apartment complex of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government 40-ro Mari-ro 93 (hereinafter "the apartment complex of this case")

(2) On March 11, 2009, the Defendant was a business proprietor who constructed and sold the instant apartment in accordance with the Housing Act for the management of 13 households, 987 units (372 units in lots, 615 units), and their ancillary and welfare facilities. (2) The Defendant was a business proprietor who built and sold the instant apartment, and was subject to a pre-use inspection on the instant apartment by the head of Gangdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government.

3) MoM Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Modern Engineering Co., Ltd.”) was merged with the Defendant’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s Intervenor’s assistant engineering Co., Ltd.

(2) The Defendant’s supplementary intervenor, the Plaintiff’s supplementary intervenor, and the Plaintiff’s supplementary intervenor, were awarded a contract with the Defendant for the construction of the instant apartment. B. The Defendant removed all of the following parts from December 4, 2014 to February 27, 2015: (a) the outer wall of the instant apartment from the outer wall of the instant apartment from December 4, 2014 to February 27, 2015: (b) the fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition; (c)

2. Judgment on the main defense of this case

A. 1) The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff constitutes a double lawsuit was filed against the Defendant on April 24, 2012, against the Seoul Central District Court 2014Gahap528244, which is the Seoul Central District Court 2014Gahap528244. Therefore, even though the Plaintiff could seek damages from the defect of the apartment of this case, the Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case is unlawful as it constitutes a double lawsuit. 2) The Plaintiff’s lawsuit of this case constitutes a separate subject of lawsuit if the cause of the lawsuit differs in cases where the two subject of the judgment are based on the same factual basis (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da9760, 97777, Sept. 11, 2008). In principle, in cases of a claim for damages in lieu of defect repair, it is reasonable to deem that each different subject of lawsuit constitutes a separate subject of lawsuit depending on the defect.

On April 24, 2012, the Plaintiff is the Defendant.