The costs of appeal are assessed against each appellant.

The plaintiffs sought reduction on the ground that the provision on forfeiture of down payment of this case constitutes liquidated damages, and even if the above provision is a penalty, they sought partial return of the down payment confiscated on the ground that it is invalid because it is against the law on the regulation of terms and conditions or public order and good morals, and in this case, the independent party intervenor sought partial payment on the claim for the refund of the down payment against the defendant of the plaintiff IMMM industry, the court below rejected the plaintiffs' claim against the defendant of the independent party intervenor on the premise that the provision on forfeiture of down payment of this case constitutes a penalty not for liquidated damages but for an estimate of damages, and it does not fall under the terms and conditions, and it does not fall under a case of partial invalidation against public order and good morals

Examining the record, the above judgment of the court below is just, and there is no error of law by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence in violation of logical and empirical rules, or by misapprehending the legal principles concerning the distinction between liquidated damages and penalty, the burden of proving penalty, and the violation of the statute of limitation on the Regulation of Terms and Conditions and the invalidation of penalty provisions against public order and good morals.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against each appellant. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.