beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
The court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for dismissal or addition of part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, this case is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
[The part to be removed or added] Each of the 3th 10, 14th 14th 3th 10 and 14th 14th m "the road occupation permit of this case" shall be deemed to be "the street store in the E market (F. hereinafter "the street store of this case")."
The fourth to the last place shall be as follows:
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. The instant sales contract constitutes the sale of another person’s right under Article 569 of the Civil Act. In principle, it is impossible to transfer the instant right to occupy and use the road, and for this reason, the Defendant did not transfer the right to occupy and use the instant road to the Plaintiff, and the head of Seoan-si sent a letter to the Plaintiff that the said permission will be cancelled if it is sold on a street.
Ultimately, the Defendant entered into a situation where the right to occupy and use the instant case could not be transferred to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff, as a duplicate of the statement of grounds of appeal, expressed his/her intention to cancel the instant sales contract, pursuant to Article 570
B. The Plaintiff purchased the instant right to occupy and use the road of this case with knowledge that it is possible to change the name. However, the Plaintiff became aware that the instant right to occupy and use the road of this case, in principle, is impossible to change the name.
The fact that it is impossible to change the name of the right to occupy and use the road of this case is an error in the important part of the contract. Thus, the plaintiff shall serve the copy of the statement of grounds for appeal of this case on the grounds of mistake and express his/her
C. Ultimately, as the instant sales contract was rescinded or revoked, the Defendant was from the Plaintiff.