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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. On October 12, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a lease agreement with the Defendant on a deposit of KRW 20,000,000, monthly rent of KRW 500,000, monthly rent of KRW 500,00, and the lease period of KRW 24 months (hereinafter “instant lease agreement”) with respect to the building 104 (area 26.4 square meters; hereinafter “instant store”) located in Busan-gu Busan-gu, Busan-gu, Busan-do, which was owned by the Defendant, and thereafter operated the instant house at the instant store.

B. Meanwhile, on March 3, 2009, the area where the instant store is located is included in the zone of D Housing Redevelopment Improvement Project (hereinafter “D Redevelopment Project”) for which the approval for implementation of the Housing Redevelopment Project was obtained from the head of Busan Special Metropolitan City Office on March 3, 2009

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap evidence 6, and the purport of each fact-finding conducted on April 3, 2018 and June 15, 2018, as a result of each fact-finding conducted on June 15, 2018.

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that whether the instant store is included in the redevelopment area is a very important factor in the content of the contract, and that the Plaintiff, a lessee, did not conclude the contract if he had known such circumstances. Therefore, the Defendant, a lessor, to enter into a lease contract without notifying the Plaintiff, constitutes a tort against the duty of disclosure in real estate transaction.

However, while entering into the instant lease agreement with the Plaintiff, the Defendant’s wife, representing the Defendant at the time, did not notify the Plaintiff of the fact that the cost of the region where the instant store was located within the instant redevelopment project area. The Plaintiff, who was unaware of such circumstances, concluded the instant lease agreement and incurred losses by investment in facilities for the operation of the instant store.

Therefore, the Defendant’s tort damages due to breach of duty of disclosure amounting to KRW 12 million and mental.