beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. The parties' assertion
A. The Plaintiffs asserted that they concluded a real estate sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with the Defendant to purchase the Gyeonggi-do 387 square meters and E large 93 square meters (hereinafter “the subject matter of the instant sales”) owned by the Defendant. At the time, the Plaintiffs determined that the sale price per square meter of the subject matter of the instant sales was KRW 6.4 million and determined as KRW 9.30 million.
Therefore, the instant sales contract constitutes a “sale that designates a volume” under Article 574 of the Civil Act, and the Defendant is obliged to compensate the Plaintiffs for damages equivalent to KRW 61,952,000, which is equivalent to 9.68 square meters, which is a difference between the area indicated in the sales contract and the actual area, or return the purchase price corresponding thereto by reducing the sales price.
B. The defendant's assertion that there was no conclusion of a sales contract designating the plaintiffs and quantity.
2. The "sale and purchase" as stipulated in Article 574 of the Civil Code refers to the case where the parties set the price based on the volume of the specific goods which are the object of the sale and purchase based on the proposal that the parties have a certain quantity. Thus, even if the parties have determined the purchase price by the method of specifying the value per unit area according to the ordinary number on the public record and multiplying the unit area by the area on the public record, in the sale and purchase of land, the sale and purchase of the land can not be said to be a "sale and purchase by designating the quantity" immediately on the sole basis of such circumstance. If the parties have assessed the designated division as a whole and the calculation by the ordinary number is only one standard, it is not a "sale and sale by designating the specific quantity" if it appears that it was a means to determine the price of the land between the parties. On the other hand, the purchaser believed that there is a certain