손해배상(기)
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.
1. The reasons for this part of the underlying facts are as follows: “290,00,00 won” in the 17th sentence of the 3rd judgment of the first instance court is as follows: “2,90,000,000 won”; “3,512,880 won for non-performance penalty imposed pursuant to this case’s 3,320,000 won in November 16, 2017; and “The court shall pay 3,512,80 won for non-performance penalty imposed on December 21, 2017; and 3,512,80 won in the 3,512,80 won in the 3,3,200,000 won for non-performance penalty imposed on December 5, 2018; and 4th sentence of the 19th judgment is as follows: “The additional reasons for non-performance penalty is specified in the main sentence of the 14,000 won in the 4th judgment; and each of the 19th judgment.
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. On March 23, 2016, Defendant B was the party who extended the instant extension portion, and sold it without notifying the Plaintiff of the fact that there was an illegal building at the time of concluding the instant sales contract, and thus, Defendant B violated the duty of disclosure as a contracting party.
Therefore, Defendant B should compensate the Plaintiff for the damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the illegal act committed intentionally or by negligence.
In addition, if the object of the sale lacks the objective nature and performance expected in terms of transaction norms, or the party lacks the nature scheduled or guaranteed, the seller bears the warranty liability for the buyer due to the defect.
If the use and profit-making of an article is restricted due to a legal disorder imposed on the article itself, it shall be deemed the defect of the article. Therefore, the defendant B is liable to compensate the plaintiff as the warranty liability pursuant to Articles 580 (1) and 575 (1) of the Civil Code.
Therefore, Defendant B may reduce the market price of the building of this case caused by the removal of the extended part of this case to the Plaintiff (19,157,740 won, and ② The area of the building of this case to be leased due to the removal of the extended part is reduced.