1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff asserted that the defendant purchased 110cc 10cc 4 Oral Ba (hereinafter "the plaintiff of this case") from the defendant in 1,100,000 won, and the defendant did not comply with the defendant's request for repair in the case of defects that do not come from the time immediately after the delivery of the above Oral Ba.

Therefore, the Plaintiff cancels the above sales contract on the grounds of the Defendant’s warranty liability or nonperformance, and the Defendant is obligated to return the sales price of KRW 1,100,000 to the Plaintiff.

2. Determination

A. On August 27, 2013, the Plaintiff purchased the instant Obaba in KRW 1,100,000 from the Defendant, and the fact that the present Obaco does not take place at the present time is not disputed between the parties, or recognized by comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions of evidence Nos. 2, 4, and 6 and the purport of the entire pleadings.

B. However, in light of the fact that the above Oral Ba had occurred at the time when the Plaintiff received the Oral Ba from the Defendant (the fact that there was no dispute between the parties concerned), the above Oral Ba has not been passed thereafter (the plaintiff's assertion that the above Oral Ba had been delivered immediately after the delivery of the Oral Ba, and according to the defendant's argument, about one week has passed from the defendant), and the above Oral Ba did not go. However, the statement of No. 4 alone is insufficient to readily conclude that the reasons that the above Oral Ba does not go at present are due to the above Oral Ba itself's defect, and there is no other evidence.

C. Even if the above error exists in the Oral Ba itself, the buyer may rescind the sales contract only if the objective of the sales contract can not be achieved on the grounds of the defect of the object, and whether it constitutes such a case should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the contents and degree of the defect, the period and expenses to be used for repair, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da27625, Sept. 9, 2010).