1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company established on September 3, 2013 for the purpose of producing and selling soundproof boards and bags, etc., and the Defendant is the owner of a factory building constructed on the instant land and the instant land, which is the B-cheon-si factory site of 452 square meters, C-site land of 1,293 square meters, D-site land of 6,335 square meters, E-site of 212 square meters, F-forest land of 70 square meters, G forest and 77 square meters, H forest and 75 square meters, G forest and 3,414 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”).

B. On November 28, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a real estate sales contract with the Defendant to purchase the instant land and its ground buildings with a price of KRW 545 million (in the sales contract, KRW 450 million) (hereinafter “instant contract”), and paid down payment KRW 45 million to the Defendant.

C. On December 3, 2013, the Plaintiff visited Youngcheon Viewing Viewing to inquire of the matters for the new construction or extension of the factory on the instant land. On December 11, 2013, the Plaintiff sent to the Defendant a content-certified mail stating that it is impossible to newly construct or extend a building other than the existing building because the instant land was a conservation and control area. On December 11, 2013, the instant mail reached the Defendant around that time.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, testimony by J of the first instance court, purport of whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. First of all, the Plaintiff concluded the instant contract with the Defendant that it is possible to newly construct or extend a factory on the instant land by deception, and the content-certified mail stating the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to cancel the instant contract on this ground reaches the Defendant, and thus, the instant contract was lawfully cancelled. Therefore, the Defendant asserts that the Defendant is obligated to return the down payment KRW 45 million to the Plaintiff for reinstatement.