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

A. Defendant B Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “B”) is a company with the purpose of leasing and papering construction machinery, selling and arranging construction machinery, and Defendant C is an intra-company director.

B. In around 2018, the Plaintiff requested Defendant D, who was aware of the punishment of pro-friendly friend, to help purchase of a middle dump truck.

Accordingly, Defendant D had contacted Defendant C who had arranged the purchase of his dump trucks before.

C. On May 18, 2018, the Plaintiff concluded a sales contract to purchase the instant vehicle from E (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) between Defendant C and the owner of the dump truck listed in the attached Table (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) at Defendant D’s recommendation, with the content that the Plaintiff purchased the instant vehicle from E in KRW 89,000,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. After the Plaintiff’s assertion entered into the instant sales contract, the status of the instant vehicle was checked, and the external appearance, including loading and presses, was colored, and Hand printed out the vehicle, and the vehicle was weak, and there was a defect in water leakage by being loaded down the lower part.

From June 2018, the Plaintiff started work using the instant vehicle from around March 2018, and around KRW 39,000,000 was disbursed as repair cost of the said vehicle from March 2019.

In addition, Defendant D said that the instant vehicle was a one-person borrower vehicle, but the Plaintiff confirmed the register of automobile, E was a vehicle acquired from F.

If the plaintiff knew that the vehicle of this case is the vehicle acquired from the owner of the previous ownership acquired by E, he would not purchase it.

After all, Defendant D and C had the Plaintiff enter into the instant sales contract by deceiving the Plaintiff on the relationship between the defect of the instant vehicle and the former owner as above.

On the other hand, the Construction Machinery Management Act.