A. Sale and purchase on May 27, 2005 with respect to the real estate stated in Paragraph 1 of the Attached List to Plaintiff A.

A. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments in the evidence Nos. 1, 3, 4, 6, and 14 as to the cause of the claim, Defendant C was a person who constructed and sold an apartment house of 180 households under the name of “J apartment” (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”), and Defendant C entered into a sales contract on the first real estate of this case with Defendant C, and Plaintiff A entered into a sales contract on May 27, 2005, and Plaintiff B entered into a sales contract on May 24, 2005 with respect to the second real estate of this case. Thus, Defendant C is obligated to transfer the ownership of the first real estate of this case to the Plaintiff on May 27, 2005, and Plaintiff B on May 24, 2005, except under special circumstances.

B. Defendant C, in fact, did not purchase the real estate of this case from Defendant C, but only lent its name in preparing a false sales contract to obtain part payments from the bank. Thus, the sales contract concluded with the Plaintiffs was null and void as a false declaration of conspiracy, but there is no evidence to acknowledge it. Rather, considering the overall purport of the pleadings in each of the above evidence and evidence Nos. 7 and 10, in addition to the whole purport of the pleadings, Defendant C, the father of the Plaintiffs agreed to transfer the business right to Non-Party C while Non-Party C, the father of the Plaintiff, transferred the business right to Non-Party C, and as a price for the transfer of the business right to Non-Party C through M Co., Ltd., which was the construction of the apartment of this case, and accordingly, it can be recognized that the Plaintiffs purchased the real estate of this case Nos. 1 and 2 by means of a free contract.

Therefore, Defendant C’s defense is without merit.

2. The plaintiffs' claims against the remaining Defendants.