1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. In order to prevent the spread of high pathogenic avian influenza (hereinafter referred to as “AI”), the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit seeking payment of KRW 88,029,930, which was the sum of KRW 12,590 (12,122,60), additional feed cost due to delay in shipment, and KRW 18,085,00 (18,085,00) additional feed cost due to delay in shipment, and KRW 17,822,30 (17,82,30) of the account payable for stabilizing income, and the court of first instance dismissed all the Plaintiff’s claims, and appealed only KRW 52,122,60,60 of the abolished original amount.

Therefore, the subject of this Court's adjudication is limited to the above 52,122,600 won.

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The original fluoral fluor who entered the primary claim(compensation for loss) shall release the original 45 days with good commercial capacity, and when the shipment is delayed, the original fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral fluoral flus

However, due to the Defendant’s order to restrict the movement, the Plaintiff was unable to be supplied with the original feed from January 9, 201 to January 12, 201, and the original health status was omitted.

In addition, the plaintiff's original (14,800 water) entered on November 26, 2010 shall be shipped on or around January 10, 201, and the defendant, upon notification of the result of the blood examination, died of the 5,635 water from among them without timely shipment. On December 17, 2010, the number of 6,955 water was abolished due to delay in notification of the result of the blood examination.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 12,590 water (=5,635 water +6,955 water) purchased amount of KRW 52,122,60,00 to the plaintiff, which was discarded due to orders for restriction on movement and delayed notification of blood test (hereinafter “instant order for restriction on movement, etc.”) by analogy of Article 48(1)1 of the Livestock Salt Prevention Act by analogy to compensation for losses under Article 48(1)1 of the same Act.

(b) the conjunctive cause of the claim;