logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.09.10 2015나2019559
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. The reasons for the court's explanation of this case are as follows, with the exception of the deletion from the third bottom of the judgment of the court of first instance to the third bottom of the judgment, and the second to the fifth third part from the fourth bottom to the fifth part from the second one as follows, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. For this, the defendant asserts that the portion of the appraisal used "2" was a serious error in the appraisal method, such as the amount of the rights presented by the plaintiff in the meeting data for approval of the plan to guide the application for parcelling-out or the management and disposal of the land, the KB real estate market tax, the Korea Appraisal Board tax, the market price appraisal result of other similar cases, the market price appraisal result of the appraisal appraisal corporation requested by the defendant, and the appraisal corporation's market price appraisal result. In addition, in conducting the appraisal, the appraiser D of the first instance court did not reflect the location and buildings of the object, the floor, and the factors of the formation of the value by the time correction or the time revision, and did not reflect the different weight in the appraisal method. However, it is difficult to conclude that the appraisal result of the appraiser D of the first instance court merely by the above circumstances alleged by the defendant committed a serious error in the appraisal method, and thus, it cannot be viewed that the appraisal method was contrary to the empirical rule or unreasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da6167679, etc.).

“”

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the defendant's appeal is without merit, and it is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow