1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the principal lawsuit and the counterclaim by the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff).

The grounds asserted by the plaintiff and the defendant in the judgment of the first instance are not different from the already asserted in the judgment of the first instance.

이에 이 법원이 이 사건에 관하여 적을 이유는, 아래의 내용을 고쳐 쓰거나 추가하는 외에는 제1심판결의 이유 기재와 같으므로 민사소송법 제420조 본문에 의하여 이를 인용합니다. 고쳐 쓰는 부분 제1심판결의 이유 중 3의 ‘나. 손해배상의 범위’(8면 1행부터 9면 16행까지의 부분)를 아래와 같이 고쳐 씁니다.

B. Article 202-2 of the Civil Procedure Act provides that “The amount of damages shall be calculated,” reflecting the previous precedents, the term “the amount of damages” refers to “the amount of damages, even though the occurrence of the damage is recognized, and where it is extremely difficult to prove the specific amount of damages in light of the nature of the case, the court may determine an amount deemed reasonable by taking into account all the circumstances recognized by the overall purport of pleadings and the result of the examination of evidence.” Except as otherwise expressly provided, this provision is the same as the provisions applicable to not only damages due to nonperformance or tort but also damages pursuant to special Acts. Where it is extremely difficult to prove specific amount of damages despite the occurrence of damages, if it is difficult to prove specific amount of damages, the court shall not easily dismiss the claim for damages, and if it is difficult to prove specific amount of damages, it shall deliberate on the specific amount of damages by demanding the verification by actively exercising the right of explanation, etc. If the specific amount of damages cannot be found even after that, in light of the above legal principles, the amount of damages can be recognized by taking into account indirect facts constituting the basis for the calculation of damages (see, etc.).

In full view of the aforementioned facts and the evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings.