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. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following parts, and thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. As follows, the 4th 9 to 5th 18 parallels in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be applied to the parts that have been dried up.

“2) As to the claim for cancellation of a mistake, it is sufficient that: (a) in order for a witness to cancel a juristic act on the ground that the mistake of motive for determination as to the cause of the claim falls under the mistake of an important part of the contents of the juristic act, it is sufficient to indicate the motive to the other party as the content of the declaration of intention; and it is deemed that there is an agreement between the parties to separately consider the motive as the content of a juristic act in the interpretation of the declaration of intent; however, there is no need to reach an agreement between the parties to regard the motive as the content of a juristic act as the content of a juristic act. However, the error of the contents of the juristic act should be related to the important part of the mistake to the extent that it would have been deemed that the ordinary general public would not have made the expression of intent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 97Da26210, Sept. 30, 197).

According to the above facts, the Plaintiff believed that the instant facilities will not be removed is an error of motive in relation to the instant sales contract, but was indicated as the content of the sales contract between the original Defendant, and the result of the commission of appraisal by the A-O certified public appraisal corporation at the court of first instance.