1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. From July 15, 2014, the Defendant is a person engaged in automobile sales business with the trade name of “C”.

B. On February 2, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased the 2007 Hyundai Tracck (hereinafter “instant vehicle”) from the Defendant for KRW 45 million, and paid KRW 10 million on February 2, 2015, the remainder of KRW 36 million on February 25, 2015 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). The main contents of the instant sales contract are as follows.

Article 4 (Liability for Warranty) The Plaintiff shall not be liable to the Defendant for the failure or defect of the vehicle after taking over the vehicle from the Defendant.

Vehicles inspection and performance inspection for the matters of special agreement;

On February 16, 2015, the Plaintiff completed the registration of transfer in the name of E Co., Ltd. on February 17, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3 evidence, Eul 1, 2, and 3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff had the Plaintiff enter into the instant sales contract by deceiving the Plaintiff, on the ground that the Plaintiff did not deliver a checkup slip to the Plaintiff or notify the Plaintiff of the fact that there was any defect in engine or engine of the instant vehicle, etc., even though he knew that there was any defect in the instant vehicle.

The Plaintiff spent KRW 4,028,00 in total with the repair cost of the instant vehicle (i.e., engine repair cost of KRW 2,728,000,000). As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff KRW 4,028,00 in compensation for damages and delay damages.

B. We examine the following circumstances: (a) it is unreasonable to require a used vehicle dealer to inspect the vehicle in a complete integrity with respect to the used vehicle, and to notify all defects, as a whole, in the testimony of the witness F of the first instance trial; and (b) it is unreasonable to require the user of the used vehicle to verify the vehicle in a complete integrity of the entire pleading; and (c) it is reasonable to impose the duty