손해배상(기)
1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) and the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) are dismissed.
2. The Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) raises an objection.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, and this case is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following dismissal or addition.
(except for part in relation to C). 2. Scrapping or adding
A. Of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the Defendant’s “Defendant” is deemed to be “Defendant and C,” “Defendant C” to be “C,” and “the result of this court’s commission of the measurement and appraisal to the Director of the Korea Land Information Corporation at the first instance court’s request for a survey and appraisal to the Director of the Nutrition of the Korea Land Information Corporation at the first instance court, and the result of this court’s inquiry into nutrition of the Director of the Korea Land Information Corporation at the third instance court,” and the witness J’s testimony at the third 19th 3th 19th 19th 19th 3th 3th 20 or added
B. Grounds of the first instance judgment
1.(a)
1) Paragraph 3 shall be advanced as follows:
1) On March 6, 2009, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with D to purchase (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”) unregistered facilities, composts, and composts (the buildings unregistered are located in H; hereinafter “the instant buildings”) located in the land adjacent to the instant case, buildings, and G, 736 square meters (hereinafter “instant adjacent land”) of land adjacent to the instant case, buildings, and G, 736 square meters (the instant adjacent land was divided into KRW 3,610 square meters and 4,136 square meters prior to H; hereinafter “the instant forest”).
[3] On June 29, 2010, September 30, 2010, the Plaintiff subrogated 80,472,511 won of D’s debt to the Nutrition Agricultural Cooperatives as the name of payment of the purchase price of this case.
C. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows.
3. Determination on a counterclaim
A. 1) The defendant is a party to the sales contract of this case, and the plaintiff is a party to the sales contract of this case.