1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. Of the appeal costs, the part relating to the Plaintiff’s appeal is the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to the partial dismissal as prescribed in paragraph (2), and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 4

(Attachment 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance) Nos. 5, 19, 6, and 12 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be followed as follows.

“A. Determination as to the existence or absence of a defect. 1) As a result of the appraisal by the standard appraiser, the appraiser’s appraisal method is respected insofar as the appraisal method violates the rule of experience or lacks rationality (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da84608, 84615, 84622, 84639, Jan. 12, 2012). As such, the Defendant and the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter “Defendant”)’s assertion as to the existence and scope of the defect should be determined on the basis of whether it is possible to reverse the credibility of the said appraisal result.

2) Determination of the gist of the Defendant’s assertion on the item of individual defects [public 10.18] Determination of the item’s assertion on the Defendant’s assertion on the item of individual defects [public 10.18] and the specifications and quantities of trees in the complex of trees in the complex of trees in the complex of trees in this case are not different from the design drawing prior to the pre-use inspection. However, there is such difference as a result of the deterioration, with a lapse of ten years or more due to climate change and management error, etc., and there is a result of loss, such difference as above. Therefore, this can only be seen as either a defect in construction, or at least a defect after the use inspection (two years after the use inspection). Thus, the appraiser cannot be seen as “pre-use defect” [reuse approval]. The appraiser stated the shortage and height of trees in the field investigation process by making a survey of the size and height and the number on the corresponding quantity, and identified the quantity of aesthetic trees in the method of indicating the number on June 21, 2018.