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. On April 16, 2015, the Plaintiff purchased from the Defendants the Seocho-gu Seoul Central Real Estate Agent Office (Order Broker E) for KRW 501,00,000 (hereinafter “instant loan”) owned by the Defendants at KRW 390,000 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 2, 2015.

B. At the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the item “the number of wall pages” of the confirmation and explanatory note of the object of brokerage prepared by the real estate agent E is written in body in the column “.”

C. The building of this case is the five-story residential structure of steel reinforced concrete structure completed around 2002, and is the five-story top of the loan of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, or described in Gap evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion of this case’s lending of this case contains defects such as water leakage on the wall, the Defendants, the seller, are liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to the cost of repairing the water leakage as the warranty liability.

B. According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 3 and 4, it is recognized that there was a defect such as ice due to water leakage on the wall of the loan of this case at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract.

However, in full view of the following circumstances recognized by the description of Eul evidence 2, the witness E’s testimony and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff was aware of ices, etc. due to water leakage existing in the loan of this case at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, and the Plaintiff purchased this water by reflecting it in the sales price. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit.

1) It seems that the above defects were, or could have been, known to some extent due to the deterioration of the building in which about 14 years have elapsed since the building was constructed as of the date of the sales contract. (2) The Defendants were to return to the Republic of Korea at the time.