1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the owner of the above building C in the following city, who operates a restaurant with the trade name “D” in the above building, and the Defendant is a business operator selling and installing solar-powered facilities.

B. On October 11, 2017, the Plaintiff explained that the installation of solar energy facilities by the Defendant reduces the electricity rates of KRW 200,000 per month, and entered into a contract with the Defendant to establish solar energy facilities in KRW 16,50,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”) on the said building with the Defendant, and paid KRW 16,50,000 to the Defendant by November 2, 2017.

C. However, after the installation of solar-powered facilities, the situation where the amount of electricity charge reduced far less than the originally explained was continued.

In other words, the instant contract states the power generation volume of solar facilities to be installed in 315w and 30 units of installation, and the monthly average power generation volume based on this is 1,134w (=315w x 30 x the average day hour 4 x 30 days). The monthly average power generation volume of solar facilities installed in the Plaintiff building was 767w and monthly average rate was 9,208 won.

Accordingly, from February 2018, the Plaintiff raised an objection, demanded the removal of solar facilities and return of the price, and the Defendant also promised to remove solar facilities and return the price by recognizing the Plaintiff’s objection.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 4, 6 through 8, Eul evidence Nos. 7, 9, and 10 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts based on the judgment, there is a defect in solar-powered facilities installed by the defendant to the extent that the degree of the defect can not achieve the purpose of the contract of this case, and the contract of this case was lawfully rescinded by the plaintiff's declaration of intent of rescission or agreement between the plaintiff and the defendant. Thus, the defendant's restoration to the original state shall serve the plaintiff with a copy of the complaint of this case as well as the plaintiff of this case.