beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. On December 1, 2005, the plaintiffs asserted that they were recommended by the defendant to purchase D Forest land 16,463 square meters (hereinafter "the forest land in this case") owned by the defendant. In this case, the defendant stated the plaintiffs that "the market price of the forest in this case would be misunderstanding if the forest land was developed and entered the U.S. village," and together with the plaintiffs, the defendant showed E forest land as if they were the forest land in this case E (hereinafter "E forest").
The Plaintiffs purchased the forest land of this case from the Defendant at KRW 230 million (the Plaintiff KRW 90 million, Plaintiff B KRW 140 million, and KRW 140 million) after leaving the forest land E as above (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”), and the forest land of this case was finite, not E forest land shown by the Defendant. The instant forest land was finite, not E forest land shown by the Defendant.
At the time of the instant sales contract, the Defendant deceivings the Plaintiffs regarding the location, development potential, etc. of the instant forest, and the Plaintiffs are revoked by serving a duplicate of the instant complaint.
Therefore, the Defendant, as unjust enrichment from tort damages or cancellation of a contract, should return to the Plaintiff A the amount of KRW 90 million, KRW 140 million to the Plaintiff B, and the delay damages therefrom.
2. According to the appraisal results by the appraiser F, the plaintiffs purchased the forest of this case from the defendant around December 29, 2005 at KRW 230 million. Around that time, the market price of the forest of this case is about KRW 26 million.
However, in light of the following circumstances, Gap evidence Nos. 2, 7 through 11, and Eul evidence Nos. 1, which can be seen by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings, the result of the fact finding about the South and North Gun of this Court alone is about the location, etc. of the forest of this case.