1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On July 2, 2012, the Plaintiff purchased heading 121 Dong 101, Busan Northern-gu C (hereinafter “instant apartment”) from the Defendant.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). B.

At the time of the instant sales contract, public relations materials distributed by the Defendant at the time of the instant sales contract, and on the completion drawings, wild flowerss and resting places were installed near the instant apartment 121, but the Defendant arbitrarily modified the design and installed a parking lamps in its original form, instead of a resting area.

C. The foregoing design modification did not fall under the “minor matters” stipulated in the Housing Act, the Act on the Maintenance and Improvement of Urban Areas and Dwelling Conditions for Residents, and the instant sales contract, and the Defendant did not obtain the Plaintiff’s consent, but the Defendant did not obtain the above design modification. Even if the design modification did not obtain the Plaintiff’s consent, it exceeded the extent that the benefit of the view of parking lot reduction is infringed and the damage caused by light and noise

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay consolation money of KRW 24,00,000 and delay damages to the plaintiff as compensation for damages arising from the above unlawful design modification.

2. Determination

A. (1) As to whether the contents of an advertisement become the contents of an apartment sale contract, it is not related to the appearance and quality of apartment buildings, such as road expansion, among the contents of the advertisement, but it is difficult for the seller to expect that the contents of the advertisement will be fulfilled from among the buyers in light of social norms, as it is, the contents of the sale contract. However, for instance, the advertisement of the actual means of sale and theme park is about the appearance and quality of apartment, and it is possible to implement it (see Supreme Court Decision 2005Da5812, Jun. 1, 2007). Meanwhile, the seller's default liability or warranty liability in the apartment sale contract is sold.