The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of any statement in the supplemental appellate brief not timely filed).

In the appraisal of property value under Article 90 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act (hereinafter “Bankruptcy Act”), the objective standard of appraisal shall be the value assessed on the assumption of the company’s continuation and rehabilitation, i.e., the company’s dissolution and liquidation, i.e., the company’s dissolution and disposition, not the disposal value of individual property premised on the

At this time, the method of evaluating the value is a standard method based on the profitability principle such as profit reduction method, but it is sufficient to express objective values in consideration of the continuity of the company even if it is based on the valuation method based on the cost principle such as cost method or the transaction comparison method according to the type and characteristics of the property.

(see Supreme Court Order 90Ma954, May 28, 1991). This also applies to calculating the value of the subject matter of rehabilitation security rights pursuant to Article 141(4) of the Debtor Rehabilitation Act.

After comprehensively taking account of the adopted evidence, the lower court determined that the value of the instant real estate, which is the object of rehabilitation security right, should be assessed on the premise that A continues to hold the instant real estate and conduct business activities. Therefore, the value of the instant real estate should not be assessed on the basis of the acquisition cost of the instant real estate, solely on the premise that A resells the instant real estate in violation of the agreement on restriction on resale; and that it is reasonable to assess the value of the instant real estate as the value of the instant real estate as of March 31, 2013, which was based on March 31, 2013, when the decision on commencing the instant rehabilitation procedure was rendered.

In light of the aforementioned legal principles, the lower judgment’s proposed value of rehabilitation security, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.