The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 2

A. On the grounds in a written judgment, a judgment on a party’s assertion and other means of offence and defense shall be indicated to the extent that it is possible to recognize that the text is justifiable, and no judgment on all parties’ allegation and means of offence and defense shall be required

(Article 208 of the Civil Procedure Act). Therefore, even if a court’s ruling does not state a direct judgment on the matters alleged by the parties, if it is possible to find out that the parties have cited or rejected such assertion in light of the overall purport of the reasons for the judgment, it cannot be deemed an omission of judgment. Even if a court’s ruling was not yet made, if it is obvious that such assertion would be rejected, it cannot be said that there

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da218 Decided July 10, 2008, and Supreme Court Decision 2011Da87174 Decided April 26, 2012, etc.) B.

The lower court: (1) (1) During the period from November 30, 2006 to December 29, 2008, the Plaintiff filed a request for correction of reduction 1, 2, and 3 of the judgment of the lower court by asserting that (i) the Plaintiff paid customs duties by importing 404 imported goods, such as the 158 items among the claims for correction of reduction 158 items among the claims for correction of reduction 1, 2, and 3, as indicated in the judgment of the lower court, but (ii) the Defendant rejected each disposition on January 23, 2009 and May 4, 2009; (iii) on December 31, 2010, the lower court recognized the remainder of the disposition of rejection on the ground that the Plaintiff did not reduce the customs duties on the 13 items among the claims for correction of reduction 1, 2, and 13 items among the claims for correction (hereinafter referred to as “the remainder of the disposition of rejection”).