Of the part concerning the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance, the amount exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below.

The first instance court, within the scope of the judgment of this court, accepted part of the plaintiff's main claim and the defendant's counterclaim, and dismissed both the plaintiff's remaining main claim and the defendant's counterclaim.

Therefore, since only the defendant appealed against the defendant among the part against the principal lawsuit of the first instance judgment, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the principal lawsuit.

As to this case, the court of the first instance cites this case as stated in the reasoning of the first instance judgment, except for a partial modification of the conclusion of the first instance judgment after adding or adding the reasoning below to the entry below, it shall accept it pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. The following is added subsequent to “the method to determine” of 10, 16, 16, 10, 16, of the first instance judgment:

7) On May 15, 2014, a day before preparing the instant agreement, the Plaintiff demanded J and N to transfer 200 square meters of the land to the Plaintiff among the instant land. In light of the relationship with the Defendant and N and the circumstances that the J delivered to the Plaintiff a certificate of personal seal impression directly issued by the Defendant, it is not deemed that there is a justifiable reason only to confirm whether the Plaintiff delivered the said Plaintiff’s request or to confirm whether the power of attorney was conferred upon the Defendant (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da46828, Nov. 12, 2009; Supreme Court Decision 92Da31842, Nov. 27, 1992; Supreme Court Decision 92Da31842, Nov. 27, 209; Supreme Court Decision 2002Da31842, Nov. 27, 2012).

나. 3)항(제14면 제1행부터 제11행까지)을 아래와 같이 고쳐 씁니다. 3) 피고의 채무불이행으로 인한 손해배상책임 가 손해배상책임의 발생...