1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On June 13, 2018, the Plaintiff purchased (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) 32,000,000,000 from the Defendant, Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and received the instant real estate by paying the purchase price of KRW 32,00,000 to the Defendant around June 22, 2018.

【Ground for Recognition: Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings】

2. The assertion and judgment

A. On June 26, 2018, the cause of the instant claim: (a) the instant real estate was discharged through the kitchen sewage hole of the instant real estate, which was taken place on the same day; (b) the water was flooded; and (c) the instant real estate was again flooded on July 8, 2018; and (d) the instant real estate was flooded due to the sewage basin at the time of the decline.

Although the Defendant had been informed of the fact that sewage districts had been flown away in the past at the time of the instant sales contract, and that there was a need for sewage pipe construction work, the Defendant did not induce the Plaintiff by failing to notify the fact.

Therefore, the Plaintiff claims that the sales contract of this case be cancelled or cancelled (the Plaintiff’s assertion that the sales contract of this case would be null and void). The Plaintiff sought compensation for total damages of KRW 6,688,00,000, including refund of the purchase price of KRW 32 million to the Defendant, registration fee, bond brokerage cost, real estate brokerage cost, directors’ cost, sales cost, sewage equipment repair cost, labor cost, accelerator repair cost, accelerator, accelerator registration cost, and clothes washing cost, etc.

B. On June 26, 2018, the instant real estate, which was landed on June 26, 2018, was set aside by a public sewage culvert between two Dongs in which the instant real estate is located, resulting in the inundation of the instant real estate, and the water was flooded. On July 8, 2018, the fact that the instant real estate was flooded by a public sewage culvert again was not disputed between the parties, or that there was no dispute between the parties, and part of the evidence No. 2, No. 3, and pleadings.