beta
Text
1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:
The defendant has the column for the third claim in the attached list to the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. This part of the judgment as to the primary claim, namely, the claim for return of unjust enrichment following the cancellation or cancellation of the apartment sale contract in this case between the plaintiffs and the defendant, and the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment in the first instance pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act,
However, the attached list of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be substituted by the attached list of this judgment.
2. The plaintiffs asserted as to the preliminary claim that the court had well known that development projects such as the third consecutive landing bridge and the second airport railway will not be implemented as the content of the advertisement of this case, and deceiving buyers by making a false or exaggerated advertisement as if all of the development projects were implemented. The defendant's advertisement for sale in lots constitutes a false or exaggerated advertisement under Article 3 (1) of the Act on Fair Labeling and Advertising (hereinafter "Indication and Advertising"), and thus, the defendant's assertion to the purport that the defendant is responsible for compensating the plaintiffs for damages caused by such advertisement under Article 10 (1) of the Display and Advertising Act or Article 750 of the Civil Act.
Judgment
According to Article 3(1)1 of the Act on Labeling and Advertising and Article 3(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act and Article 3(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, false or exaggerated advertisements refer to advertisements that are likely to deceive or mislead consumers by making a false or exaggerated advertisement, and are likely to undermine fair trade order. Whether such advertisements are likely to deceive or mislead consumers should be objectively determined on the basis of the total and extreme increase that ordinary consumers receive the pertinent advertisement.
[See Supreme Court Decision 2011Da82438, 2011Da82445, 2011Da82445, and 201Da82452, Apr. 10, 2014, etc.] In addition, business operators, etc.