임대차보증금
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as follows, except for the addition of "additional Judgment" as to this case, and therefore, it is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of
[Additional Determination] [Supplementary Decision] Although it is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff and the Defendants agreed to terminate the instant lease agreement where at least three medical doctors are treated in D, or the Plaintiff, a lessee, could not be deemed to have agreed to terminate the instant lease agreement, in light of the following circumstances, the Plaintiff appears to have been able to cancel the instant lease agreement on the grounds of motive mistake. ① In order to cancel a legal act on the grounds that motive mistake falls under an error in the important part of the contents of a legal act, it is sufficient to acknowledge that the motive is deemed to be the content of the relevant declaration of intent and that there is a legal act in the interpretation of the said declaration of intent, and it is not necessary to conclude that the parties agreed to separately consider the motive as the content of the said declaration of intent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da1456, Jul. 22, 2010). ② The Plaintiff and the Defendants determined that the Plaintiff leased the instant store from the Defendants for the purpose of operating a pharmacy, and that the Plaintiff and the Defendants paid the term of the lease agreement to 2000 days, including the average lease deposit.
③ According to the above facts, the Plaintiff is premised on the fact that a child-only specialized hospital with three or more medical doctors is opened and operated in D with the store of this case.