손해배상(건)
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: “3. Judgment among the grounds of the first instance judgment” is the same as the grounds of the first instance judgment, except where the part of “3. Judgment” among the grounds of the first instance judgment is dismissed as set forth in paragraph (2). Thus, this is cited by the main sentence
2. Determination
A. Determination as to the establishment of warranty liability under Article 574 of the Civil Act (1) 1) The term "sale and purchase" as stipulated in Article 574 of the Civil Act refers to the case where the parties set the price on the basis of the specific goods that are the object of the sale and purchase at a certain quantity. Thus, since the sale and purchase area of real estate has only a single standard, if it appears that it was a tool for the parties to specify the real estate and to determine the price, it shall not be deemed a sale and purchase designated for a quantity (see Supreme Court Decision 2002Da65189, Jan. 24, 2003). However, according to the above facts, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the sale and sale area of the real estate constitutes an object of sale and purchase at a different price as determined by the sale and purchase agreement, not a sale and purchase price determined by the whole price of the land of this case.
Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion that the contract of this case is a contract for the sale of quantity is without merit.
B. The Plaintiff, as to whether the warranty liability under Article 572 of the Civil Act is established, may not remove the obstacles of this case by the Defendant.