1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance except for the addition of the judgment of the plaintiff’s assertion to the court below as stated in paragraph (2). Thus, it is citing it as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Additional determination as to the Plaintiff’s assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) As the judgment of removal of the instant building became final and conclusive at the time of the application for compulsory auction, the Plaintiff became faced with the situation where the removal of the instant building was to be carried out. As such, the Plaintiff cannot achieve the purpose of auction, and thus, the said contract is rescinded in accordance with Articles 578(1) and (2) and 575(1) of the Civil Act.

Therefore, the Defendants jointly have the obligation to pay the proceeds of sale and the damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

3) In addition, the Defendants did not notify the Plaintiff of the defect in the instant building, such as the foregoing 1). As such, the Defendants jointly have a duty to compensate the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to the market price of the instant building pursuant to Article 578(3) of the Civil Act.

B. Article 578(1) of the Civil Act provides that the provisions of Articles 570 through 577 of the Civil Act concerning the so-called “defect of a right” shall apply to an auction. On the other hand, Articles 580(2) and 581(1) of the Civil Act explicitly stipulate that in the case of an auction, Article 580(1) of the Civil Act concerning the seller’s warranty liability shall not apply to a seller’s warranty liability. As such, in an auction, the warranty liability arises only when there exists “the defect of a right” in the collateral and there is “the defect of a thing” in principle. The warranty liability does not occur in the auction and there is “the defect of a thing.” The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence No. 18 and No. 18, No. 3 and the purport of the entire pleading