용역비
The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
purport.
1. The grounds alleged by the defendant in the trial while filing an appeal by the court of first instance are not significantly different from the contents alleged by the defendant in the court of first instance, and the judgment of the court of first instance is justified even if the whole purport of the evidence presented in the court of first instance and the court of first instance shows the whole purport
Therefore, the reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is as follows, except for the addition of the judgment of the Defendant to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance court, and thus, this court’s reasoning is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
(hereinafter the meaning of the abbreviationd language used in this section is the same as that of the first instance judgment). 2. Additional parts
A. The summary of the defendant's assertion 1) Part A of the evidence No. 7 contains part not relating to the hotel of this case, and it is unreasonable to accept the result of the original judgment's appraisal as it is. 2) The agreement between the plaintiff and D is also effective to the defendant. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is without merit.
B. Determination 1) Regarding the assertion about the appraiser's result of appraisal, the appraiser's appraisal result shall be respected unless there is a obvious error such as that the appraisal method is contrary to the empirical rule or unreasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da93790, Nov. 29, 2012). In light of the fact that the defendant had an opportunity to examine the evidence as alleged in the court below through an inquiry about the appraiser, and that the defendant expressed his intention not to inquire about the problems of the appraisal result as alleged in the instant case, it is insufficient to recognize that the defendant's assertion was significantly erroneous. Since there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise, the above argument by the defendant is without merit (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da93790, Nov. 29, 2012).