The defendant shall bear the costs of appeal.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the Defendant and C agreed that the Defendant would not claim any unfair profit equivalent to the rent for the instant land against C under the instant contract.

and after February 11, 2017, after one month from the date of termination of the contract, the liability for additional expenses incurred after February 11, 2017 is against C.

Therefore, the lower court did not err by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations as to the part of the lower judgment rejecting the Defendant’s partial offset on the grounds that it cannot be seen that it exceeded the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, thereby adversely affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

On the other hand, the defendant's primary ground of appeal is about the judgment of the court below on the ownership or right to dispose of the factory of this case.

However, the above part of the judgment of the court below is merely an additional judgment, and as seen earlier, C is exempted from the duty of return of unfair profit equivalent to the rent for the land of this case under the contract of this case, and there is a liability for additional expenses incurred after one month from the date of termination of the contract of this case to C.

As long as we affirm the judgment of the court below that it cannot be seen, since the legitimacy of the above additional judgment of the court below does not affect the conclusion of the judgment, the ground of appeal on this issue cannot be accepted without further need to be determined.

Therefore, the appeal shall be dismissed and the costs of appeal shall be borne by the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.