1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in paragraph (2) is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the judgment of the parties on the assertion made in the trial is added. Therefore, it is cited in

[Supplementary or additional parts] Subsequent to the evidence submitted by the Defendant (including the evidence submitted in the trial) as follows: 7th below, the evidence submitted by the Defendant is added.

The plaintiff of the 9th 9th eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth eth e.

12. (4) The last part of paragraph shall be added as follows:

“The Plaintiff, around December 2014, decided to include the obligation on the collateral security in the purchase price, and the obligation on the collateral security exceeds the balance, and thus, the Plaintiff already performed the obligation to pay the balance. However, in light of the amount of the said purchase price and the intent of the parties at the time of the instant sales contract, it cannot be deemed that the Plaintiff agreed to accept all the obligation on the collateral security that was established on the instant real estate, and it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff’s agreed to accept was KRW 400 million.”

2. Determination as to the assertion made at the trial

A. As to the Plaintiff’s assertion of damages, the Plaintiff asserts that the Defendant should pay the amount equivalent to the rent due to the breach of the duty of disclosure under the contract or tort caused by deception, since the Plaintiff was aware that the Defendant had known that the collateral collateral obligation of each of the instant real estate would amount to KRW 450 million and had the Plaintiff pay the amount higher than the purchase price even though he had the obligation to notify the said amount, so that the Plaintiff could not acquire the ownership of each of the instant real estate by further demanding that the remaining amount would be KRW 36 million.