A grand argument story is about an inequity. The inequity exists BETWEEN the throughlines, not in any one place -- it is an imbalance and the story is about the efforts to restore balance. Sometimes balance is restored for all. Sometimes balance is only partially restored. Sometimes balance is not found at all.
The Story Outcome (Success or Failure) describes the objective evaluation of results of the effort to restore the balance.
- Success = Objective Balance Restored
- Failure = Objective Balance NOT Restored
The Story Judgment (Good or Bad) is the subjective evaluation of results of the effort to restore the balance.
- Success = Subjective Balance Restored
- Failure = Subjective Balance NOT Restored
As an audience we tend to blend the Outcome and Judgment and see them as:
- Happy Ending (Success/Good)
- Tragic Ending (Failure/Bad)
- Bittersweet Ending (Success/Bad or Failure/Good)
This leads audiences to assume that Success, Failure, Good, and Bad are inextricably connected. However, there is no direct causal relationship between Outcome and Judgment, which is why we (as authors) can explore any combination of the two in a story.
This leads to the specific answers to your questions:
No, story judgment bad does not mean the MC solution has not come into effect because the determination of the MC solution is controlled by the MC Resolve of Change -- which is independent of the Story Judgment.
No, if by "a main character solve their original problem" means resolve their inequity because their subjective inequity is controlled by Story Judgment, not the MC problem or MC solution.