1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

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

1. Basic facts

A. On May 30, 2016, the Plaintiff purchased 15.4t roller (registration number C; hereinafter “instant construction machinery”) from the Defendant, construction machinery, from KRW 25,630,00 in the name of “D” (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and completed the registration of transfer by delivery of the said roller on the following day.

B. After that, the Plaintiff repaired the instant construction machinery as the instant construction machinery does not work normally, and during that process, the Plaintiff spent the transportation cost of KRW 2,200,000, and the repair cost of KRW 8,415,00.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant repair cost”). [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including number number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence No. 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the construction machinery of this case was sold by the Defendant as if there were no defects, thereby causing damages equivalent to the repair cost, and the Defendant is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages for the total amount of KRW 10,615,00 (=2,200,000) and damages for delay.

B. We examine whether there is a defect in the construction machinery of this case, and there is no evidence to prove that the defendant sold the construction machinery of this case to the plaintiff.

(O) According to the evidence Nos. 1, 1, 3, and 5, the Plaintiff and the Defendant agreed at the time of the instant sales contract that “the Plaintiff shall not be liable to the Defendant for any reason, such as breakdown or defect, after acquiring the instant construction machinery.” On May 30, 2016, E, an engineer of D, visited a factory where the instant construction machinery is located, to confirm whether the instant construction machinery is operated under the trial and normal operation, and then the Plaintiff entered into the instant sales contract and received the instant construction machinery delivery). Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s construction machinery manufacturing year of the instant construction machinery.