계약금반환
1. The plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) 4th, 5th, 1th, 4th, 6th, 8th, 5th, 5th, 5th, 5th, 5th, and 8th, “Witness E” to “Witness E of the court of first instance”; (b) 4th, 13th, “this court” to “court E of the court of first instance”; and (c) 4th, 13th, 5th, 5th, 5th, 5th, and 8th, as “Witness E of the court of first instance”
2. Judgment on the plaintiffs' assertion
A. The plaintiffs, even if they were aware of the facts of this case's unauthorized extension at the time of the conclusion of the sales contract of this case, they asserted that the plaintiffs, as the plaintiffs, Eul, and I, did not have any separate problem, and they are merely 2,500,000 and 3,000,000 won per year, and they are merely 1 year to the effect that there was no damage to the plaintiffs, and thus, they would lead to the conclusion of the sales contract of this case. Thus, they asserted that the sales contract of this case was revoked as an expression of intent due to fraud under Article 110 (1) of the Civil Code or an expression of intent due to mistake under Article 109 (1) of the Civil Code.
However, at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the fact that the plaintiffs knew about the fact of the non-permission extension as seen earlier, and thus, the possibility of imposing administrative sanctions, such as non-performance penalty, could sufficiently be considered as the plaintiffs. Even if the amount of non-performance penalty notified by the defendants and licensed real estate agents at the time of the conclusion of the sales contract is different from the amount of non-performance penalty imposed actually after the conclusion of the sales contract, such circumstance alone alone is that the defendant had the intention to deceiving the plaintiffs.
No loss shall be considered at all even if the enforcement fine is imposed.