The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The summary of the grounds for appeal (misunderstanding of facts or misapprehension of legal principles) is that the Defendant confirmed the market price by means of estimating the market price at F’s request, not that the Defendant conducted the real estate appraisal using the appraisal method used by the appraisal business entity.

Judgment

Article 2 subparag. 7 through 9 and Article 43 subparag. 2 of the former Act on the Public Notice of Values and Appraisal of Real Estate (amended by Act No. 13782, Jan. 19, 2016; hereinafter “Real Estate Act”) defines “appraisal business” as a business of appraising land, etc. in return for a certain remuneration at the request of another person, and defines “appraisal business” as “appraisal business” as “business of appraising land, etc.” and “appraisal business” as “business of appraising land, etc.” under Article 27 and a corporation of appraising authorized under Article 28, which defines as “appraisal who reported pursuant to Article 27 and an appraisal business entity who is not an appraisal business entity, shall be punished for conducting an appraisal business in return for a certain remuneration at the request of another person.

2) Article 31 of the Act on the Public Announcement of Real Estate provides that the principles and standards to be observed by appraisal business entities shall be prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport in order to ensure fairness and rationality in the appraisal of land

Accordingly, Article 14 and Article 15 of the Regulations on the Appraisal enacted stipulate that when an appraisal business entity conducts an appraisal of land, the time for the appraisal should be revised by applying the land price fluctuation rate based on the publicly notified land price, and when an appraisal of a building is conducted, the depreciation should be revised by considering the content training based on the construction cost of the building.

Judgment

Based on the above legislation, the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly adopted and investigated by the lower court are considered, the Defendant’s economic value of real estate.