The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A. Unless there are special circumstances, comparative standards shall give priority to specific-use areas within the urban planning zones, and shall be selected by giving priority to the actual land category in accordance with the actual situation of use outside the urban planning zones. However, if there is no such land, considering the characteristics of the land category, use, surrounding environment, location, etc., the natural and social conditions must select the land identical or most similar to the land subject to appraisal. Even if there is a little difference between the specific-use area or surrounding environment, etc. of the reference land and the land subject to appraisal, such a difference may be considered in material comparison such as analysis of regional factors or individual factors, and it cannot be readily concluded that

(1) Article 202 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “The court shall render a judgment as to whether a factual assertion is true in accordance with logical and empirical rules based on social justice and the principle of equity by taking into account the purport of the entire pleadings and the result of examination of evidence (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da64627, Sept. 10, 200).” The court shall render a judgment as to whether a factual assertion is true by free conviction (see, e.g.

(Article 432 of the same Act). (b)

For the reasons indicated in its holding, the lower court determined that the Defendant’s submission of a transaction price report on the land subject to the imposition of development charges calculated the land price at the time of termination of the land subject to imposition, premised on the application of the land price as at the time of commencement based on the reported purchase price, and that it was lawful to select the standard

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing this judgment of the court below is a fact-finding court.