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

A. The Plaintiff is a heavy and conjectr belonging to OWP, a company that runs the business of selling and buying used cars.

B. On October 25, 2013, the Defendants purchased and owned the instant vehicle from E in 2008 FSI Quat (hereinafter “instant vehicle”).

C. On January 29, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased the instant vehicle from the Defendants for KRW 75,000,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) under the brokerage of F and G sales contract, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of OWP PP, a company to which the Plaintiff belongs.

On February 23, 2015, the Plaintiff: (a) sold the instant vehicle to H for KRW 81,00,000; and (b) subsequently, H visited the Research Service Center to repair the instant vehicle on September 10, 2015; (c) confirmed that the instant vehicle was repaired from the same service center from July 29, 201 to January 10, 201; and (d) requested the Plaintiff to refund the said vehicle; and (e) on October 1, 2015, the Plaintiff received the instant vehicle from H to refund the already received sales amount, and paid the previous amount.

[Ground for recognition] Facts without dispute between the parties, Gap evidence 1 through 4, Eul evidence 2 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of whole pleadings, and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff asserts that at the time of the instant sales contract, the Defendants had the responsibility for nonperformance or tort due to the incomplete performance of the instant sales contract, by failing to accurately notify the Defendants of the fact that the flood accident occurred in the instant vehicle, and instead notifying the Plaintiff of the cost of handling the accident occurred in July 27, 201 concerning the instant vehicle of the fact that the costs for handling the accident occurred in July 27, 201 were the vehicle’s charges.

(b).