소유권이전등기
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1..
1. The reasons why the court of the first instance as to this case are stated in this case are as follows: (a) the Defendant’s withdrawal of part of the claim by this court; (b) deleted each of the 7-3-8 and 10-7 through 12-1 of the first instance judgment as to the Defendant’s withdrawal of part of the claim; and (c) the Defendant’s determination of the claim that is specifically emphasized by this court as the grounds for appeal is identical to the statement of the first instance judgment, including the attached Form, except for addition to Paragraph (2) after adding a judgment as to the claim that is specifically emphasized by this court as the grounds for appeal (However, the part concerning the co-defendant and the assignee, which is excluded from the part concerning the separate and finalized
2. Determination on the grounds for appeal
A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion 1) The appraiser of the first instance court calculated the appraisal value of the instant land immediately by applying the official land price standard method, and did not undergo the process of examining the reasonableness of the said appraisal value through comparison with the market price calculated by other appraisal methods, such as the transaction comparison method, pursuant to the main sentence of Article 12(2) of the Rules on Appraisal and Evaluation (hereinafter “Appraisal Rules”). As a result, the appraisal result of the said appraiser did not include development gains anticipated to occur from the instant project. Nevertheless, the first instance court accepted the above appraisal result as it is, and received from the Plaintiff a payment of KRW 380,70,000 from the Plaintiff for the purchase price, at the same time, the Plaintiff performed the registration procedure for transfer of ownership of the instant land, and ordered the Plaintiff to deliver the instant land. Therefore, it is unlawful.
B. A concrete review is the evidence duly adopted and examined by the first instance court, and even if the evidence additionally examined by this court was presented, the method of appraisal, etc. by the said appraiser was considerably erroneous because it is against the rule of experience or unreasonable.