2. After an appeal is filed.

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) A serious defect exists in the instant building on the ground of fraud, and there exists an illegal extension on the third and fourth floors of the instant building. However, the Defendants did not notify the Plaintiff thereof, which constitutes deception by omission. The instant sales contract was concluded by deception by the Defendants, and thus, should be revoked pursuant to Article 110(1) of the Civil Act. (2) The Plaintiff entered into the instant sales contract with the Defendants without knowing the serious defect in water leakage and illegal extension existing in the instant building. (3) The instant sales contract was concluded by mistake by mistake, and thus, it should be revoked pursuant to Article 109(1) of the Civil Act.

3) There were significant defects and illegal extension in the instant building claiming the cancellation of the instant sales contract due to warranty liability or nonperformance. Accordingly, the Plaintiff became unable to achieve the purpose of the sales contract. B) The instant sales contract was rescinded upon the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to cancel the contract. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as follows: (a) the corresponding part of the judgment of the first instance court (Articles 5, 14, and 8, and 4, as well as the corresponding part (Articles 5, 14, and 4) to the effect that the Plaintiff’s assertion is rejected; and (b) such part is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420

Not more than 6 pages 5, “The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize it,” and the part “A evidence 6-1, 2, 2.