1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The parties' assertion

A. On November 22, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that he/she purchased KRW 15,500 in total at KRW 15,500,000 (i.e., KRW 3,000 x 5,500 - 1,000 - KRW 1,000) with the Defendant’s share of KRW 15,50,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). Around that time, the Plaintiff paid KRW 15,500,000 to the Defendant for the crusal crusal cruscscitusine (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

However, the cruital wals that the plaintiff actually harvested are less than 1,300 wals and less than the contract was entered into with 4,200 wals and quality (part is presumed to be based on the defendant's without permission), and quality was not determined.

Therefore, the Defendant is obliged to pay to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to KRW 3,900,000 (=3,000 x 1,300 x 1,300) and the amount equivalent to KRW 4,20,000 due to insufficient quality due to insufficient quality (=1,000 x 4,200 x 4,200).

B. The Defendant’s assertion was concluded by the method of stegying (the so-called dry field transaction). However, the amount of wals 10 containers (one container is equivalent to 5) in wals wals wals wals wals wals wals wals wals wal

Since the crusital trade determines the quantity of crusital tree by considering the area of planting crusital tree, the size of trees and the distance of planting, etc. when confirming the crusital subject to the sale, the actual yield may exceed or fall short of the quantity determined at the time of the contract. Since the plaintiff entered into a contract with the method of crusital trade with a well-known knowledge of these circumstances,

2. First of all, as to whether the instant sales contract constitutes “a sales contract designating a quantity” designated as a 5,500 walsium, each of the descriptions of the health class, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers) is insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

In addition, when the contract of this case is concluded, the plaintiff and the defendant are specially involved in the quality of walsty.