The buyer was not aware of the defect in the subject matter of sale by negligence;

In addition to the perusal of real estate register, it is common sense that a purchaser of a site as a park is investigating and seeing in advance whether the site conflicts with the road according to urban planning. However, even though the Plaintiff responded to the site in entering into the contract of this case, if it was erroneous that the Plaintiff was using it as a 10 square meters or road out of 30 square meters of the site, the Plaintiff was negligent in not knowing that there was the defect.

Article 580 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff

Defendant 1 and one other

Seoul High Court Decision 78Na2707 delivered on March 20, 1979

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the determination of evidence and the recognition of facts are matters belonging to the exclusive jurisdiction of the judge of the court below. The court below, based on the facts without dispute between the parties and various evidences of the city, if the defendants, who are the married couple, were to purchase the site of December 20, 1968 from the non-party under the name of the defendant 1, and became divided into ten square meters on the land cadastre as of July 8, 1968. After the plaintiff's on-site investigation, 30 square meters on June 11, 1970 after the plaintiff purchased 30 square meters on the land from the defendants on the register of June 11, 1977. Since part of the land purchased as a park was incorporated into the road, the court below's determination of facts is without merit, and if the plaintiff did not know about the above facts as to the defect in the sale and purchase of the land as a park, the plaintiff did not know about the defect in the sale and purchase of the land as well as about the road.

There is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to seller's warranty liability.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Hah-hak (Presiding Justice)