1. “False or exaggerated advertisement” under Article 3(1)1 of the former Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising (amended by Act No. 11050, Sep. 15, 2011; hereinafter “Fair Labeling and Advertising Act”) refers to an advertisement that is likely to deceive or mislead consumers by falsely or excessively excessively overstating facts, and that is likely to undermine fair trade order.

On the other hand, a general consumer may form the overall emerculation by comprehensively taking into account not only the expressions presented by the sentences, words, designs, designs, designs, sounds, or combinations thereof directly expressed in the advertisement, but also the matters indirectly expressed and expressed, and customary and ordinary circumstances. As such, whether an advertisement is likely to deceive or mislead consumers should be objectively determined on the basis of the overall emerculation impression that general consumers with common caution accept the advertisement in question.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 201Du82 Decided June 14, 2013; 2013Da22553 Decided November 14, 2013, etc.). 2. Reviewing the reasoning of the lower judgment and the evidence duly admitted by the lower court reveals the following facts.

The defendant around July 2008 is the company that sold the apartment house C in Yangju-si (hereinafter "the apartment of this case"), and the plaintiff is the person who purchased the apartment of this case 308 Dong 1002 from the defendant.

B. According to the housing site development plan in Gyeonggi-do in 2004, in the vicinity of the apartment site in this case, three elementary schools (tentative name 1 high school, high school 2 elementary school, high school 3 elementary school) and one middle school (tentative name 1 high school ) were designated in the vicinity of the apartment site in this case, which is below the Gyeonggi-do East-do Office of Education.