[2] The case holding that although the purchase price was determined by means of multiplying the area entered in the public register by the usual price, the land is distinguished from neighboring land and the purchaser confirmed the current status of the land by asking answers before the conclusion of the sale contract, it is not "the sale designated by the quantity"

[2] The case holding that the sale and purchase of a parcel of land is not "the sale and purchase designated quantity" but "the sale and purchase of a parcel of land is specified according to the partitioned boundary, where the sale and purchase price was determined by recording the area of the land in the sale and purchase contract in accordance with the registry and reducing the outstanding amount of money from an amount calculated by multiplying the area by the usual price, but the land is divided by roads, miscellaneous trees, etc., and the purchaser confirmed the current status of the

1. On the first ground for appeal

The "sale and purchase" under Article 574 of the Civil Code refers to a case where the parties have set the price on the basis of the volume of the specific goods which are the object of the sale and purchase at a certain quantity. Thus, even if the parties have determined the price of the land by the method of multiplying the unit area by the size on the registry book, the sale and purchase of the land can not be regarded as "the sale and purchase of the land by the method of multiplying the unit area by the size on the registry book." If the parties have determined the price of the land by the method of multiplying the unit area by the size on the registry book, the sale and purchase of the land can not be regarded as "the sale and purchase by the parties" merely because the designated division was evaluated as a whole and the calculation by the usual number was only one standard, so it is not "the sale and purchase by the parties" designated as "the sale and purchase by the parties" (see Supreme Court Decision 92Da5674 delivered on June 25, 1993). On the other hand, if the purchaser believed that there was a certain area, it should be the sale and sale price.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, at the time when the plaintiff and the defendant entered into the sales contract for the land of this case, the court below stated the size of the object to be sold as '834 square meters (252 square meters)' according to the entry on the register of real estate injury, and decided 370 million won in the above area multiplied by the amount of 1.5 million won per square meter and the purchase price of this case was reduced by 1.5 million won, and found as a result of the survey that the actual area of the land of this case was 746 square meters, but the land of this case is divided into roads, miscellaneous trees, housing, etc., and the actual area of the land of this case was confirmed as 746 square meters. However, since the plaintiff confirmed that the land of this case was located in two times prior to the conclusion of the sales contract of this case, the sale and purchase of the land of this case cannot be deemed as 'the designated volume', and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of facts or misunderstanding of legal principles as alleged in the grounds for appeal.

2. On the second ground for appeal

In comparison with the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below's rejection of the plaintiff's assertion on the premise that there is no evidence to prove that there was an agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant to settle the amount equivalent to the difference between the land area on the public register and the real area in the purchase price is just and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of facts against the rules of evidence. There

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Song Jin-hun (Presiding Justice)