1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the plaintiffs' preliminary claim against the defendant is revoked, and that part is revoked.

1. Grounds for the court's explanation on this part of the facts are with merit 2.

A. Since the part of the facts of recognition is identical to the corresponding part of the plaintiffs and the defendant, they shall be quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) If they knew that public pedestrian passage and shielding view are installed within the apartment site of this case, and that there is a serious infringement on the plaintiffs' ownership of the site and the right to use the site accordingly, they did not purchase the apartment of this case. 2) The defendant sufficiently explained and informed the plaintiffs who purchased the apartment site of the fact that public pedestrian passage and shielding view are installed within the apartment site of this case before and after the contract negotiation stage, and did not inform the plaintiffs of the fact at all.

3) The plaintiffs suffered losses equivalent to the amount stated in the "request amount" column in the attached Table, which is the share of the apartment of this case, in relation to the plaintiffs' respective apartment of this case, as to "the market price of KRW 6,434,782,00 when the site for the pedestrian passage of this case was used as a site and the market price of KRW 3,05,169,00 when the site for the pedestrian passage of this case was designated as a public pedestrian passage" in the above tort of the defendant. Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay damages to the plaintiffs the amount stated in the "request amount" column in the attached Table, which is the share of the apartment of this case.

B. In light of the empirical rule, where it is apparent in light of the fact that the other party to a transaction would not have been notified of certain circumstances in real estate transactions, it is obligated to notify the other party of such circumstances in advance in accordance with the principle of good faith.

However, the apartment building of this case in this case is a public passage and a public passage. (See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da5812, 5829, 5836, Jun. 1, 2007).