1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. Basic facts

A. (1) The Defendant is a company that constructs and sells the Defendant’s sample houses (hereinafter “instant officetels”).

B. The officetel sold by the Defendant was divided into 12 types depending on the structure and size of the officetel sold by the Defendant, and the Defendant prepared and displayed, to the publicity hall of the instant officetel, a model house for Atain, the supply area of which is 6.7 square meters, and a model house for Jin, the supply area of which is 71.46 square meters.

B. (1) On December 201, 201, the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff’s wife’s husband and wife visited the instant officetel’s advertising center to place it, and thereafter, one of the instant officetels was to purchase bonds, and the sales contract was prepared as indicated below (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The purchaser’s column for the instant sales contract (the Plaintiff’s name, resident registration number, address, contact address, and hand-on phone) was written by C.

The main contents of the contracts for sale in lots are as follows:

The indication of the object of sale: The area of the instant officetel 906 [D-propertype]: 51.923 square meters (17.35 square meters in exclusive use area, 34.573 square meters in public use area) and co-ownership shares of 5.1130 square meters in co-ownership shares of 5.1130 square meters in lots (126,609,260 square meters in common use area, the scheduled date for completion of April 2013 (the scheduled date for completion may be changed according to the process, and the date of occupancy shall be later notified) and the remainder of the down payment and the remaining payment of the down payment on March 10, 2012 at the first 3rd 4th 10th 2th 2012: Within 18,91,905,250,398,981,939,981,930,930,951,981,95

C. The Defendant issued a ground plan, etc. upon entering into a common contract for sale in lots, issued a written confirmation of contract, design modification consent, and ground plan along with the contract for sale in lots. Whether the above documents were not delivered at the time of entering into the contract for sale in lots, and the Plaintiff visited to take the procedure for the loan of intermediate payments on February 7, 2012.