1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning for the court of first instance’s explanation as to this case is that the defendant’s argument that the defendant’s board of directors did not adopt a resolution on the cost associated with traffic impact assessment as additional evidence submitted at the trial of the court of first instance is insufficient to recognize the defendant’s assertion that there was no resolution on the cost associated with traffic impact assessment, and that the statement of evidence No. 20 through No. 22 of the court of first instance (including the number of pages) is excluded. In addition to the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance, the phrase “ around June 2012” in No. 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance as “ around May 201” is the same as the statement in the grounds for the judgment of the

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