2.This Court is added.

However, on the three sides of the judgment of the first instance court, "to lease to lessee, to lease at the leased store" to lessee, and to lease at the leased store.

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. On February 24, 2009, the Defendant: (a) as between C and C, acquired the Defendant’s right to dispose of the entire unsold stores of the instant commercial building under the pretext of the payment for the construction price; (b) as a result, written the instant agreement with C to jointly accept the Defendant’s obligation to pay the instant fees or the obligation to pay in lieu thereof to the buyers, including the ancillary Plaintiffs, concurrently.

B. After that, on November 12, 201, 201, the Defendant’s agent S entered into a payment agreement with the management body of the commercial buildings (hereinafter “management body”) and the Plaintiff, and the Defendant entered into an agreement with the Plaintiff to transfer five stores (L02, L04, E01, F02, and F16) among the instant commercial buildings (hereinafter “instant payment agreement”) to the Plaintiff A to the specific contents of the said payment obligation.

C. However, the Defendant voluntarily disposed of four stores (L02, L04, E01, and F16) among them, and the rest of one store (F02) is not performed in kind despite the Plaintiffs’ demand for performance.

Plaintiff

A is delegated with the authority to receive the payment in kind from the preliminary plaintiffs and agreed to transfer the above five stores from the defendant in accordance with the payment in kind of this case. The defendant is primarily obligated to pay to the plaintiff A, and the preliminary plaintiffs 1,717,758,310 won (the market price of the above five stores) as compensatory damages due to nonperformance of the duty to pay in kind under the first agreement in this case or the instant payment in kind of payment in kind. The plaintiffs are obligated to pay the above five stores in advance.