A document stating the opinion of a person of learning and experience submitted outside the litigation and the data of fact-finding;

An appraisal opinion is not necessarily required to be withdrawn from a lawsuit only by a method entrusted to an appraiser under the Civil Procedure Act, an examination, a government office, or any other agency, and even if a signature or a signature, which records an appraisal opinion prepared by a person with professional knowledge and experience outside of a lawsuit, is not unlawful by deeming that it is reasonable and reliable when it is submitted as a documentary evidence.

Articles 314 and 327 of the Civil Procedure Act

Maximum Chang-gu

Hehee (Attorney Doh-hee et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Daegu District Court Decision 64Na353 delivered on June 30, 1965

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Judgment on the first ground of appeal by the defendant-appellant;

Even if it is reasonable for the court to take the basis of the appraisal opinion based on the professional knowledge and experience in the recognition of a fact, the appraisal opinion does not necessarily require that the lawsuit be completed only by the method entrusted to the government offices or other agencies under the Civil Procedure Act, and if a document stating the appraisal opinion on a certain object by a professional knowledge and experience outside the lawsuit is submitted in documentary evidence, if the court recognizes that the appraisal opinion is reasonable and reliable by the documentary evidence, it cannot be said that there is any error of law even if it is based on the recognition of a certain fact by the documentary evidence when the court recognizes that the content of the documentary evidence is reasonable and reliable. Under the above opinion, the court below did not err in the misapprehension of the facts that the defendant constructed and owned the building on the second floor as stated in its reasoning in the judgment on the site of this case owned by the plaintiff by the defendant, taking full account of the contents of the appraisal report prepared by the Korean Association Surveyr and the testimony of Lee Pung-hee under the above opinion and the purport of the parties' arguments. Therefore, there is no error in the misapprehension of the grounds for appeal No. 1.

The judgment on the second ground for appeal

There is no error in the court below's rejection on the ground that the defendant's most purchase and sale order was not proven, and the court below found the plaintiff as the actual person and rendered a judgment on the merits by recognizing the contents of No. 1 (Evidence of Absence) and the reasons why the documents of lawsuit against the plaintiff were unknown on the ground that the documents of lawsuit against the plaintiff cannot be served on the ground that the documents of lawsuit against the plaintiff cannot be served on the part of the plaintiff's actual person, and therefore, the appeal is without merit.

Judgment on ground of appeal No. 3

As pointed out in the 8th page of this dispute, it is reasonable that the court below rejected the defendant's assertion of abuse of rights on the grounds that the value of the building owned by the defendant and the 8th grade price of the building to be removed and removed on the ground that the former cannot abuse ownership due to the fact that the former is higher than the former's price, and that there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles of abuse of rights in the decision of the court below.

Determination on the fourth ground of appeal

The court below did not err in finding that if the site was leased to the testimony of the first instance court Kim Young-young by integrating the whole purport of the party's pleading, it would be 300 won per month, and there is no error in law, and there is no argument in the appeal disputing the legitimate recognition of the court below on the contrary.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Han Sung-dong (Presiding Judge) of the Supreme Court