용역비
1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 67,201,30 and its interest on April 2, 2016.
The reasoning of the court's reasoning concerning this case is that "the plaintiff" under Articles 7 and 17 among the writing boxes of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be "the defendant", "the defendant" shall be "the plaintiff", and "the plaintiff shall be "the plaintiff", and "the plaintiff shall not include an independent judgment of the appraiser as to the result of appraisal and the result of the entrustment of appraisal supplementation and supplementation thereof. Thus, the fact-finding or determination based thereon shall not be allowed. However, the appraiser's appraisal result shall be respected unless the appraisal method is against the rule of experience or unreasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da84608, 84615, 8462, 84639, Jan. 12, 2012). Since each of the above appraisal and entrustment of appraisal and supplementation shows that the plaintiff's appraisal based on the expert knowledge and experience of the appraiser seems to have been appropriately determined based on the reasonable data, and there is no reason to reject the plaintiff's assertion that it should not be justified from 2014.
(3) The principle on the order of set-off and the result of set-off is as follows: (a) the defendant expressed his/her intention of set-off against the plaintiff as an automatic claim against the plaintiff through the written reply from August 11, 2016 and the written brief from December 9, 2016; (b) at the same time, he/she sets-off his/her claim against the defendant for compensation for delay against the defendant; and (c) the purport that he/she set-off his/her claim for compensation for delay before the claim for compensation for delay is set-off. The fact that the plaintiff did not immediately raise an objection
If so, according to Articles 499 and 476(2) of the Civil Act.