The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 5,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal is that the defendant sold the above building to the victim with significant and significant defects in the building sold to the victim (hereinafter “the building of this case”) and with concealment of civil litigation, and the act of not notifying it constitutes deception of fraud, the judgment of the court below which acquitted the defendant.

2. Determination

A. In the sale and purchase of real estate, where the seller fails to notify the buyer of any specific circumstance related to the sale and purchase, and thus, the seller is obligated to notify the buyer of such circumstance in advance, in light of the principle of good faith, if it is evident in light of the empirical rule that the buyer would not enter into the sales contract or would not pay the purchase and sale price if he/she was notified of such circumstance, without notifying the buyer of the fact.

Therefore, the seller's failure to notify the buyer of such situation constitutes deception, which is a constituent element of fraud, but it cannot affect the legal relationship due to sale and purchase, and therefore, the seller is obligated to notify the buyer of the reason that does not interfere with the realization of the buyer's right.

No one can be seen (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2014Do8540, May 28, 2015; 2001Do3349, Sept. 25, 2001). Meanwhile, the subject of the duty of disclosure can be widely acknowledged not only by the direct law but also by the general principles of contractual, custom, or cooking, and the subject of the duty of disclosure.