1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid 18 million won to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and against this, from October 1, 2017 to August 9, 2018.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

1. On July 4, 2017, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with the Defendant to purchase D apartment 101 Dong 1402 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) for three parcels outside Daejeon-gu Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu (hereinafter “instant apartment”), and paid the down payment of KRW 5 million to the Defendant on that day.

At the time of the instant sales contract, the intermediate payment of KRW 45 million shall be paid until July 30, 2017, and the remainder KRW 18 million shall be paid until September 30, 2017, and the seller would be able to take occupancy after the payment of intermediate payment and adjust the remainder time.

After that, the Plaintiff paid to the Defendant an intermediate payment of KRW 45 million, and occupied the instant apartment on July 31, 2017.

On August 2, 2017, water leakage (hereinafter referred to as “water leakage”) occurred from the benda, benda, and the wall of the instant apartment. On August 7, 2017, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant of the cancellation of the instant sales contract.

After that, on August 27, 2017, the Plaintiff moved from the apartment of this case to another place.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination on the main claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s claim 1 in the part concerning the primary main claim is that “the instant apartment was constructed in the year 2001 and was in a state of waterproofing, and that the rooftop floor was in a serious condition, and that there was water leakage prior to that.

However, since the defendant notified the plaintiff that the apartment of this case was not available in selling it to the plaintiff, deceiving the plaintiff to enter into the sales contract of this case, and failed to perform his duty to provide defective goods in accordance with the sales contract, the plaintiff must cancel the contract according to the defendant's default

Due to the leakage of this case, the defendant lacks objective nature and performance as an apartment that is a residential space, and the defendant also guarantees that the apartment is not available at the time of the sales contract of this case.