2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

A. A. On May 2010, the Defendant and the appointed parties D, E, and Non-party 1’s network F (hereinafter “instant building owners”) concluded a construction contract with Non-Party Ma Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “M”) on May 21, 2010, to remove the above land’s houses and to newly construct neighborhood and multi-household houses (hereinafter “instant loan”) such as the attached Table 1, as the owners of each land listed in the attached Table 3.

B. On May 24, 2013, the deceased on May 24, 2013, H, and I inherited the deceased, who is the wife G, and his children.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul evidence No. 1, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. On May 31, 201, Plaintiff A subcontracted the instant interior, metal, light weight, wood, and typology construction (hereinafter “the instant interior works”) to KRW 380,000,000 for construction cost ( separate from additional construction cost of KRW 80,00,000 due to additional tax and material change), and Plaintiff B subcontracted the instant installation and fire-fighting construction of the instant lending facilities (hereinafter “the instant installation fire-fighting construction”) from M on May 31, 201 to KRW 12,00,000 for construction cost (Additional tax).

B. Plaintiff A around July 201, and Plaintiff B completed each of the instant interior equipment fire fighting works, around March 2012, but the Plaintiffs occupied the instant lending from the construction completion date due to Plaintiff A’s failure to receive the remainder of the subcontract construction cost, excluding KRW 126 million received from Plaintiff A and the instant building owner. However, the instant building owner was deprived of the Plaintiffs’ possession by cutting down the key of the instant construction site of the instant lending (hereinafter “the instant construction site”) on March 30, 2012, and entering into the instant construction site by entering the said site. The Plaintiffs recovered possession on July 23, 2012, but the Plaintiffs recovered possession on July 23, 2012.

8.4. The owner of this case mobilized the police and re-convened.