2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. On December 8, 2012, Plaintiff A entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase KRW 170 million for the purchase price of KRW 701,00,000,000 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) of the Busan-gun Embol (hereinafter “instant apartment”) (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 27, 2012.

B. On December 5, 2012, Plaintiff B entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase KRW 140 million for the instant apartment No. 601 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on December 14, 2012.

C. On June 25, 2013, Plaintiff C entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to purchase KRW 140 million for the instant apartment No. 602 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on July 3, 2013.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-2, 7, Gap evidence 2-3, 7, Gap evidence 3-5, Gap evidence 5-1 through 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. At the time of concluding the sales contract for the apartment building No. 701 with the Plaintiff Plaintiff A, the Defendant agreed to set up a ceiling and a window on a balcony of approximately 15.6 square meters in front of the said apartment building and approximately 9.5 square meters in front of the said apartment building so that it can be used as a warehouse and boiler room. The said expansion construction is unlawful in violation of relevant laws and regulations, including the Building Act.

Nevertheless, at the time of the conclusion of the instant apartment sales contract, the Defendant did not notify the Plaintiff A of the above contents, and the Plaintiff A entered into the instant apartment sales contract with the said Defendant’s deception, and thus, the Plaintiff A entered into the instant apartment sales contract with the said Defendant, and the said contract was revoked.

In addition, the agreement that the Defendant agreed to set up a ceiling and a window on a balcony of about 15.6 square meters and a subsequent balcony of about 9.5 square meters is not possible to carry out because it is contrary to the relevant laws and regulations, such as the Building Act, etc.