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

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance for the acceptance of the judgment is as follows: (a) each of the “appraisals” of the 8th, 17, 10, 13, 10, 13, 11, 6, 7, 13, 17, 13, 13, 13, 9, 16, 17, 21, 14, 11, 3, 12 and 21 lines below the 9th, 9, 4 lines below the 6th, as “O”; (b) each of the “this court appraiser” of the 2nd, 6th, 12th and 21 lines under the 9th, as stated in the main sentence of Article 2 of the Civil Procedure Act, as stated in the “O”; and (c) each of the “court” of the 12th, 21 to 13 second, as stated in the Internet homepage of the court of first instance; and (d) “No 215th, 20120”).

2. The portion to be determined additionally

A. As to the Defendant’s defense of self-help, it was difficult for the Plaintiff to expect that the obstacles of this case, including the instant trees and landscaping stone, will be voluntarily transferred by September 29, 2014, which is the starting date of expropriation. If the Defendant applied for a provisional disposition in order to transfer the obstacles of this case to the court, etc., it was anticipated that at least two months would be required before taking legal measures, such as applying for a provisional disposition, etc., and if so, the Defendant would incur a loss equivalent to two-month interest to be paid by the Plaintiff to the professional manpower in charge of the golf course design, which should be paid by the Defendant to the financial institution, etc. that lent the construction cost.

In addition, if the defendant's application for provisional disposition is dismissed and compulsory execution is inevitable, the defendant can not complete civil works until April 2015, in which the defendant planned to sell DNA to golf courses.