1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.

The defendant.

1. The reasons why the court of the first instance cited this part are stated in this part of the judgment, and among the reasons of the judgment of the first instance, the "Plaintiff" of the third 10th of the judgment is dismissed as "Defendant" and 2-C.

Except to change the “judgment” as follows, it is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

“C. 1) The instant agreement was based on the premise that the Plaintiff, the Defendant, and C had ownership on the instant rooftop bank, but thereafter, the Defendant transferred ownership on the instant rooftop bank to the Defendant, while paying the lease deposit to the Plaintiff and C for the instant rooftop bank, and the entirety of the rights of lease and other disposal to the instant rooftop bank was exercised by the Defendant.

In particular, it is possible to lease only a specific part of the object of one ownership, so it does not depend on whether the rooftop bank of this case can be the object of separate ownership in the transaction separately from the house of this case.

Meanwhile, at the time of the agreement of this case, the proviso stipulated that “the construction cost is borne by both parties when repairing the part requiring repairs prior to the payment of the rent.” However, the meaning of the proviso does not mean that the Defendant’s obligation to lease does not occur unless accepting the instant rooftop, or that the Plaintiff would not bear the repair cost, in a case where the Plaintiff did not incur any repair cost, the amount equivalent to the lease deposit against the instant rooftop cannot be received from the Defendant.

According to the above facts as to the claim for damages caused by impossibility of performance, the defendant is obligated to accept and lease the instant rooftop room in accordance with the agreement of this case and the assignment of claims and pay the lease deposit to the plaintiff.

Nevertheless, it can be said.