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

A. The Plaintiffs concluded each sales contract (hereinafter “each of the instant sales contracts”) with Hyundai MCo Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Company”) with the content that the said Company would purchase a unit of G building AB, which is newly constructed on the land E and F Seoul Jung-gu E and F (hereinafter “each of the instant sales contracts”).

Plaintiff A, on December 17, 2012, the object of sale in lots and the total amount of the contract area for sale in lots (hereinafter “first shopping mall”) No. 88.2746 square meters on December 17, 2012 (hereinafter “the first shopping mall”) (2 Plaintiff B, March 112, 2012, KRW 707,060,000 for an exclusive use area of KRW 32.4 square meters, public use area of KRW 70.76,00) and KRW 84.632 square meters on March 26, 2012 (hereinafter “second shopping mall”) (hereinafter “exclusive use area of KRW 26.650 square meters”; 58.02 square meters, public use area of KRW 494,720,000 on March 25, 2012, Plaintiff C, D (each share of KRW 1/2) and 843 square meters on March 254, 2012;

(2) (26.340 square meters of exclusive use area, 61.9346 square meters of public use area, 228,170,000 won

B. The Plaintiffs paid the sales price to the Defendant pursuant to each of the instant sales contracts, and completed each registration of ownership transfer on the relevant commercial building.

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

2. Determination

A. (1) The parties’ assertion (1) The Plaintiffs’ assertion that there is a pole of 1.711 square meters in size and a window of 0.964 square meters in size on the right-hand side of the store, 1.1 square meters in size below the second shop, and 1.34 square meters in size at the entrance of the third shop, and 1.34 square meters in size at the entrance of the third shop, causing significant restrictions to the customer and the sales house line.

However, at the time of entering into the sales contract, Egynam Co., Ltd., the Defendant’s sales agent, did not notify the Plaintiffs of the existence, location, and size of the columns at all at the time of entering into the sales contract, and the Plaintiffs did not know such fact and concluded each

Accordingly, the plaintiffs have suffered damages (the amount corresponding to the size of columns and windows out of the sale price) and proceeds from the sale price and lease of the money stated in the attached Form 1 column.