beta
Text
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff, which orders payment below, shall be revoked.
The defendant.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On July 5, 2014, the Plaintiff purchased the instant land and the instant housing (hereinafter “instant land”) from the Defendant for KRW 425,00,000 from Seodaemun-gu Seoul and its ground (hereinafter “instant housing”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Plaintiff regarding the instant land and housing around that time.
B. In the instant sales contract, ① the building for the purpose of sale is “a cement brick structure, a residential (use), and 63.04 square meters (exclusive area)”; ② the copy of the instant house presented at the time of the contract is indicated as “a cement block structure, cement structure, 63.04 square meters”; ③ the current building register was written as “one story (story), mentor fixtures (use), housing (use), and 63.04 square meters (area)”; ④ the description of confirmation of the object of brokerage attached to the said sales contract was written as “a building in violation of laws”; ⑤ the said special agreement was written as “a sales contract in the form of facilities”.
다. 그런데 이 사건 주택은 1965. 4. 8.경 신축된 후 건축법상 허가나 신고 없이 증축되어, 원고가 이 사건 매매계약을 체결할 무렵에는 실제 별지 감정도 표시 ㉮ 내지 ㉳ 부분 면적 합계 122㎡의 건물(= ㉮ 위 ㉮ 부분 66㎡는 건축법상 허가받은 본건물로 보인다. , ㉯ 위 ㉯ 부분 16㎡는 위 주택 건물 내부가 아니라, 이 사건 토지와 인접한 서울 서대문구 E 토지를 일부 침범한 위 주택 담장 안의 빈공간이다. 부분 적벽돌조 기와지붕 주택 82㎡ ㉰, ㉱ 위 ㉱ 부분도 서울 서대문구 E 토지를 일부 침범하였다. 부분 적벽돌조 판넬지붕 보일러실 6㎡ ㉲ 부분 적벽돌조 스라브지붕 주택 19㎡ ㉳ 부분 적벽돌조 판넬지붕 주택 15㎡)로 증축되어...