1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, inasmuch as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical with that of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following “the second higher portion”, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence

2. The lower judgment of the first instance judgment between the 4th parallel parallel 5th parallel 5th parallel 6th parallel 5th parallel 6th parallel 6th parallel 6th parallel 6th parallel 6

(b) Of the judgments, the part “2” in the judgment is as follows:

2) According to the results of inquiry about the head of Ulsandong-gu, U.S.A., the Plaintiff, before entering into the instant lease agreement, revealed to Defendant C that he/she will engage in the instant business, and asked Defendant C whether the permission under the relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Fire Services Act, was possible. Defendant C, after identifying the application method and necessary documents for the instant business license at the Ulsan Dong-gu Office and the Dong Ulsan District Tax Office, notified the Plaintiff. The head of Ulsan-gu, U.S., the head of the Dong-gu, U.S., the Plaintiff, on August 9, 2018, notified E and H of the intention of the instant commercial building, the owner of the instant commercial building, which was the second class neighborhood living facilities (general restaurants) of the instant case, to the head of the Dong-gu, U.S., which was the owner of the instant commercial building, was changed to the Yongsan-gu, an amusement facility, and notified the Plaintiff of the restoration of its original status by September 10, 2018.

The fact that G business has been suspended may be recognized separately.

However, the circumstances revealed by considering the whole purport of the arguments, namely, ① the important part to be explained by a certified broker on the register as to the object of brokerage, is merely the contents of the right on the register and the public record, and it is difficult to view that the change of use of the building and the issue of authorization and permission for the business do not correspond to this. Thus, whether a certified broker can use the building in the instant case, which is an amusement facility (general restaurant) for the purpose of call text, which is an amusement facility, can not be said to be an important part on the instant commercial building for which a certified broker has the duty to explain to Defendant C, and ② the Plaintiff or Defendant C