The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The court shall determine whether the assertion of facts is true in accordance with logical and empirical rules, based on the principle of social justice and equity, with a free evaluation of evidence, taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings and the result of the examination of evidence (Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act). The facts duly confirmed by the court of final appeal that the original judgment does not exceed the bounds of

(Article 432 of the same Act). Moreover, an appraisal is merely an auxiliary means for a court to make a judgment where special knowledge and empirical rule are required in determining certain matters, and it is nothing more than to use such knowledge and experience as an auxiliary means to make such judgment. Thus, if a judge recognizes facts based on the appraisal result, it cannot be said that it is erroneous in the

(1) The court below held that the Plaintiff’s claim for construction cost based on the settlement agreement is groundless since the settlement agreement between D and the Plaintiff, which is a site manager, is invalid for the Defendant, based on the reasons indicated in its reasoning. (2) The costs incurred in the instant supplementary construction are recognized as the amount determined by the court below’s decision, and there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion that the costs incurred in the instant supplementary construction exceeded the amount, based on the appraisal result of the appraiser at the court below.

The purport of the ground of appeal disputing such judgment of the court below is to accept it merely because it is merely an error of the selection and value judgment of evidence and fact-finding based on the free evaluation of the court of fact-finding.

In addition, even if the reasoning of the lower judgment is examined in light of the evidence duly admitted, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the settlement agreement and calculation of the additional construction cost, or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.