The part of the lower judgment against the Defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).

1. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 1 and 3, a judgment on the party’s allegations and other means of offence and defense should be indicated to the extent that it can be recognized that the text is justifiable, and all of the parties’ allegations and means of offence and defense need not be determined.

(Article 208 of the Civil Procedure Act). Therefore, even if a court’s ruling does not state a direct judgment on the matters alleged in the grounds of appeal, if it is possible to find out that a party has cited or rejected such claim in light of the overall purport of the reasons of the judgment, it cannot be deemed an omission of judgment. Even if a court’s ruling was not yet made, if it is obvious that such assertion would be rejected, it cannot be said

(2) In light of the above legal principles, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the establishment of a golf club under Article 30(3) of the former Installation and Utilization of Sports Facilities Act (amended by Act No. 6907, May 29, 2003; hereinafter “former Sports Facilities Act”) and by misapprehending the legal principles as to the establishment of a golf club (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da218, Jul. 10, 2008). In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles as to the establishment of a golf club (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da218, Jul. 10, 2008).