1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except where part of the judgment of the first instance is cited or added as follows. Thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2.The grounds for recognition of the parallel 7 to 11 of the first instance judgment shall be applied to the part which has been used or added as follows:

As a result of the on-site verification conducted by the court of first instance on May 30, 2016 in the Korea Land Information Corporation of the first instance, although the appraisal of appraiser E and the supplementary appraisal of appraiser E have been made in the form of partial fact inquiry, they are referred to as "a supplementary appraisal" according to their substance. As a result, the fact inquiry conducted by the court of first instance on Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Office of the first instance, the fact inquiry conducted by the court of first instance on the whole purport of the pleading, the fact inquiry conducted by the court of first instance on the fact-finding, the fact-finding conducted by the court of first instance on the whole purport of the pleading, and the "......" defense" in Section 5 of the first instance judgment in Section 9-2 of the first instance judgment in the second instance as "a offset against the claim for alternative execution expenses".

The 9th written judgment of the first instance court in the 10th 9th written judgment shall be applied to the offset against this part.

The following shall be added to 9 pages 10 of the first instance judgment:

C. The defendant's assertion 1) The defendant set-off against the plaintiff's damage claim against the plaintiff by setting-off the plaintiff's damage claim against the plaintiff as the automatic claim against the separate lawsuit.

2. In full view of the purport of the evidence No. 16, the Defendant filed an application with the Seoul Central District Court 2012Kao1295 to determine the amount of litigation costs relating to the judgment of a separate lawsuit. On April 10, 2012, the lower court rendered a decision to determine that the amount of litigation costs that the Plaintiff is obligated to reimburse to the Defendant by the judgment of the separate lawsuit as above was KRW 2,669,350, and the said decision was around that time.