beta
Text
1. The defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's incidental appeal are all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.
Reasons
1. The reasons why the court of acceptance of the judgment of the first instance stated in this case are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the first instance, except for adding the judgment under paragraph (2). Thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article
2. Additional determination
A. The Defendant asserts that, on the Defendant’s assertion of appraisal value, the development gains were omitted in the appraisal value of the instant real estate, and that a mistake was made in the amount lower than the appraisal value of the neighboring apartment.
However, the following circumstances, which are acknowledged by comprehensively considering the appraisal results of the appraiser H appraiser's office and the purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., (i) the appraiser conducted an appraisal including development gains from the authorization of the above establishment and the authorization of the project implementation on May 18, 2012, which is the date of establishment of sales contract due to the Plaintiff's exercise of the Plaintiff's right to sell the instant real estate after the authorization date of the project implementation, and (ii) the appraiser violated the above appraiser's rules by comparing and assessing the same apartment 21-dong 206 of the same apartment 17,000,000 won and sold in the same complex as the instant real estate (I apartment) and the exclusive area (52.23 square meters) on November 26, 2012.
In light of the fact that the appraiser’s appraisal method, etc. is contrary to the empirical rule or unreasonable (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da69159, Aug. 20, 2014), the appraised value of KRW 179,300,00 is deemed to be the market price that reflects development gains as an objective transaction price of the instant real estate, and thus, the Defendant’s above assertion is without merit.
B. The defendant's assertion of abuse of right ( abuse of right to admit) is decided by the defendant, 262 members of the plaintiff's association, 201 members of the plaintiff.