Korea Highway Corporation (Law Firm Lee & Lee LLC, Attorneys Lee Im-soo et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Defendant (Law Firm Lee & Lee, Attorneys Lee Gyeong-hwan et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

April 21, 2016

Suwon District Court Decision 2012Ra428 Decided February 13, 2014

1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the instant principal lawsuit and counterclaim are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) in total, in the principal lawsuit and counterclaim.

1. Purport of claim

The main lawsuit is to confirm that there is no obligation to pay damages for excess damages in excess of the amount of fruit damage in the orchard located in the section of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant, 2 omitted), 3 omitted, (2 omitted), (3 omitted), (4 omitted), (5 omitted), (7 omitted), (8 omitted), (8 omitted), (8 omitted), (10 omitted), (11 omitted), (12 omitted), (14 omitted), (14 omitted), and (15 omitted), and (2) as to the payment of damages in excess of the amount of fruit damage in the section of the orchard located in the section of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant, △△△△△△△, △△△, and △△, △△, and △△, △△, △△, and △△, △△, in the direction of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant, hereinafter referred to as the “Plaintiff”).

Counterclaim: The plaintiff shall pay to the defendant 22,608,000 won with 20% interest per annum from the day following the day of service of the written application for modification of the claim and the cause of the counterclaim as of January 17, 2014 to the day of complete payment.

2. Purport of appeal

The judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked. The plaintiff's judgment is revoked. The plaintiff's judgment of the first instance court is confirmed that there is no obligation to pay damages for excess damages of orchard in Leecheon-si ( Address 1 omitted), ( Address 2 omitted), ( Address 3 omitted), ( Address 4 omitted), ( Address 5 omitted), ( Address 6 omitted), ( Address 7 omitted), ( Address 8 omitted), ( Address 9 omitted), ( Address 10 omitted), ( Address 10 omitted), ( Address 12 omitted), ( Address 12 omitted), ( Address 13 omitted), ( Address 14 omitted), ( Address 15 omitted), and ( Address 15 omitted). The defendant's counterclaim is dismissed.

The reasoning of this court’s reasoning is that, in addition to the rejection of the Nonparty’s appraisal result of the first instance court’s judgment, it is difficult to recognize that the Plaintiff’s removal materials, which were additionally submitted at the trial, were scattered and thus did not reach the instant orchard, the Plaintiff’s removal materials were scattered. As such, this court’s reasoning is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance.

Therefore, the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim of this case is dismissed in its entirety as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Jong-sung (Presiding Judge)