1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasons why this Court should explain this part of the facts are as follows: (a) the “scambling machine” of the 2nd judgment of the court of first instance 12 and 13 shall be applied to “each goods listed in the list of goods in the attached sales contract” and the part as stated in paragraph (1) of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to the part as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On the grounds delineated below the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendants are liable to pay to each Plaintiff KRW 165,790,500 and delay damages therefor.

No. 1 of the sales contract No. 1 No. 1 of the DX210W-V 1 of the DX210W, the Plaintiff could not be aware of whether the DX210W-V 1 of the structural change was made or not, and as a result of the regular inspection, the Plaintiff could only be informed of the fact that there was a structural change and it was illegal.

As a result, 30,00 won is required for the maintenance cost, the Defendants are obligated to pay 330,000 won to the Plaintiff with compensation for damages caused by incomplete performance.

B. The sales contract Nos. 2 and 3,000 won (62,00,000 won (67,000,000 won) and 67,00,000 won (67,000 won (67,000,000 won), which were higher than the above market price of each of the above mining season, were false as the sales price of each of the above mining season. Since the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract on each of the above mining season with the Defendants as to each of the above mining season due to the Plaintiff’s deception or transaction experience, the transaction price of each of the above mining season was 45,00,000 won (based on the 2005-type higher level) and the market price of each of the above mining season was 5,000 won (based on the 2006-type higher level).