Methods of explaining the result of appraisal in a written appraisal;

In calculating the construction cost for the completed portion at the time of the cancellation of a contract for construction of a building, the appraiser calculated the construction cost for the completed portion of the building at the time of the termination of the contract by regarding the material cost as it is, and the labor cost as the cost for the construction cost, 10 percent as the cost for the construction work under the contract. However, if there is no explanation or data that can be known that the unit cost for the construction cost of the building at the time of the termination of the contract is the unit cost for the construction work under the contract, it is against the rules of evidence.

Articles 187 and 393 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff

[Judgment of the court below]

Seoul High Court Decision 83Na1966 delivered on November 4, 1983

The part of the judgment below against the plaintiff is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, the court below acknowledged the fact that the non-party 2-5 and the records of the first instance trial on October 19, 1979 are as follows: (a) the non-party 436,379,400 won of the construction cost of the original building constructed at the time when the defendant performed the construction work; (b) the construction cost of the original building was to be completed until June 30, 1980; and (c) the construction was interrupted on September 23, 1980 after the date of the construction work and the date of the completion of the construction work; (d) the defendant revoked the construction contract in accordance with the right of cancellation of the contract of the contractor under Article 673 of the Civil Act and completed the construction work at the time when the contract was completed; and (e) according to the agreement and agreement between the parties 2-5 and the parties 40 of the construction cost of the building at the time of the completion of the construction work at the time of the first instance examination without dispute.

In light of the records, the court below acknowledged that the construction cost for the completed portion of the building at the time of the cancellation of the contract in accordance with the unit price of the above construction cost under the above contract is the monetary amount as indicated in its holding. The contents of the appraisal report are only the records of the appraisal report of the non-party among the results of the record verification at the court of first instance. Even if the appraisal report is examined, there is no evidence suggesting that the appraisal of the completed portion of the building at the time of the termination of the contract is calculated according to the unit price of the above construction cost under the above contract. According to the above appraisal report, the appraisal of the above construction cost is without merit in calculating the unit price of the above construction cost in accordance with the Korean Water Association at the time of the contract at the time of the conclusion of the contract at the time of the contract at the time of the appraisal of the above construction cost, and the labor cost is calculated by adding 10 percent to the unit price under the contract at the time of the contract at the time of the conclusion of the contract at the time of the appraisal report or record.

The court below's finding that the construction price for the completed portion of the building at the time of the cancellation of the contract in accordance with the unit price of the above construction contract under the above contract is the monetary amount under the judgment of the court below is erroneous in the misunderstanding of the value judgment of evidence or the facts in violation of the rules of evidence which have been recognized without evidence and it is obvious that this affected the judgment.

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal, the part against the Plaintiff is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Jeong Tae-tae (Presiding Justice)