1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant Company is a company conducting real estate sales business, etc., and Defendant C is an operator of Defendant Company, and Defendant D served as a director at Defendant Company and Defendant E as a director at Defendant Company.

B. On March 2016, the Plaintiff’s wife F entered the Defendant Company as a business employee.

C. On March 2, 2016, the macro-city made a public perusal and public announcement of the “Contract for Change in the Urban Management Plan (Fiscal Cost)” for discharged service at the time of macro-city. D.

F on March 16, 2016, on the Plaintiff’s name, purchased KRW 165 square meters of G forest 443 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) in the name of the Defendant Company from the Defendant Company, with the purchase price of KRW 74 million.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). E.

The F paid 5 million won down payment to the Defendant Company on March 16, 2016.

On March 22, 2016, the Plaintiff paid the intermediate payment and the remainder 69 million won to the Defendant Company, and on March 22, 2016, received 1,480,000 won from the Defendant Company as discount money.

F. At the time of the instant sales contract, the land use planning center was divided into small-ro two categories (breadth of 8m or 10m) in which the instant land was passed (see attached Form 1), and the said road planning line was abolished on June 2016 and was abolished on December 8, 2016.

After that, as the land use plan has been modified as shown in the attached Form 2, the road planning line was limited to the vicinity of the land in this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

가. 주위적 청구 1) 하자담보책임 내지 착오 가) 원고의 주장 피고 C, D, E은 2016. 3. 15.경 피고 회사 사무실에서 원고의 처 F에게 “이번에 거제도 땅을 판다. 그곳은 해양플랜트 및 관광산업단지로 개발될 예정이고, 이 사건 토지는 양면에 도로를 물고 있어서 개발 시 토지가 수용되어 땅값이 많이 뛸 것이니 매수하여라”고 하였다.

Accordingly, the Plaintiff is the land of this case.