2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

2. The Defendant asserts to the effect that the market price of the instant real estate recognized by the first instance court is unjust as it is based on the appraisal result of the first instance court appraiser conducted without properly investigating the instant real estate.

Results of appraisal by an appraiser shall be respected unless the method of appraisal, etc. is against the rule of experience or is considerably unreasonable, etc.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da93790 Decided November 29, 2012, etc.). In this case, in light of the fact that the entry of the appraisal report prepared by the first instance court I and the internal photograph of the real estate stated in the attached list are attached to the said appraisal report, the said appraiser appears to have made an appraisal of the instant real estate through an on-site investigation prescribed in Article 10(1) of the Rules on the Appraisal and Evaluation, and otherwise, it is not deemed that the results of the appraisal by the first instance court renders an appraisal contrary to or unreasonable from the rules on the appraisal and evaluation, etc., or from the empirical rule.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit on a different premise.

3. As such, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified within the scope of the above recognition and the remaining claims are dismissed as it is without merit. The judgment of the court of first instance is just and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.