At present, there exist several automatic tools that, given a software, find locations of possible defects. A general tool does not take into account a specificity of a given program. As a result, while many defects discovered by this tool can be truly harmful, many uncovered alleged defects are, for this particular software, reasonably (or even fully) harmless. A natural reaction is to repair all the alleged defects, but the problem is that every time we correct a program, we risk introducing new faults. From this viewpoint, it is desirable to be able to gauge the repair risk. This will help use decide which part of the repaired code is most likely to fail and thus, needs the most testing, and even whether repairing a probably harmless defect is worth an effort at all -- if as a result, we increase the probability of a program malfunction. In this paper, we analyze how repair risk can be gauged.