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 reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the dismissal of some contents or addition of some contents, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.
Part that is removed or added shall be referred to as "trade price" in Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance in Part 5.
On the 5th judgment of the first instance court, "the reply to the appraiser D's request for appraisal" in the 18th judgment shall be the "the results of the appraiser D's appraisal".
The following shall be added to the 6th judgment of the first instance court:
In calculating the market price of the instant real estate by the first instance appraiser D, the Defendant applied the “other elements to correct the factors” without reasonable grounds compared to the appraisal report of the instant real estate in the separate lawsuit. In particular, the building owned by the Defendant (hereinafter “instant building”).
In assessing E, the appraiser D asserts to the effect that the market price appraisal of the instant real estate of this case was unlawful, such as setting a lower cost than that of the building owned by the lower court. In full view of the entire purport of the pleadings as a result of appraiser D’s appraisal of this case, the appraiser D in the first instance court applied the value for “an amendment to other factors” as 1.44. However, in Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014Gahap30971 (No. 7) applied the value for “an amendment to other factors” as 1.75; the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2014Gahap30888 (No. 8) applied the value for “an amendment to other factors”; the appraiser’s appraisal of this case as 1.80 m200 m2010, 3010 m2010, 300 m250 m250 m204 m204 m2016 m25 m204.