1. The defendant who exceeds the following amount among the judgment of the first instance between the plaintiff A and the defendant.

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs and the defendant's incidental grounds for appeal by the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance. The judgment, which was duly adopted and investigated by the court of first instance, excluding the following parts: Gap evidence 7, 10, and 11; Gap evidence 12-1 and 2; Gap evidence 12-2; Gap evidence 12-1 and 17; and witness E by the court of first instance, even if the witness testimony by the court of first instance, the lower portion between the fact-finding by the court of first instance and the first instance, 6-19 to 7-2; the lower portion between the 6-19 and 7-2; and the lower portion between the 7-19 and 8-3 of the 7-19th 3th .

Therefore, the court's explanation on this case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following parts: (a) the part between the 4th to 5th, 17th of the judgment of the court of first instance; (b) the 6th to 19th of the 6th of the 6th to 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th of the 7th

2. Parts to be dried;

A. In light of the above legal principles, the part between 4th to 17th 18th 5th 17 of the judgment of the court of first instance is small, and in light of the above legal principles, according to the voice of the evidence No. 7, evidence No. 12-1 and 2 of the evidence No. 12-2, E refers to the expression “componing” while E is consulted with a certified judicial scrivener, and E refers to “I doing so by another male ditch,” and a certified judicial scrivener may recognize the fact that E “If you have filed a complaint by simple communication, for example, I would recognize that he would have recognized that he would go through,” and “I would have “I will go through, and go again, I would like to go through, the testimony of a witness E of the court of first instance, i.e., the expression “componing” at the time of consultation with a certified judicial scrivener as above.