1. Defendant B’s respective 1,250,000 won and each of the said money to the Plaintiff (Appointeds) and the rest of the appointed parties.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 17, 2017, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants purchased the land of Gangnam-si (hereinafter “instant land”) and divided it into eight parcels, and newly constructed each parcel of land into a single ownership on each parcel of land.

B. The Plaintiffs and the Defendants jointly proceed with the civil engineering works in the process of the said new construction works, and thereafter, the new housing construction works are carried out by purchasing each individual material, but the construction workers jointly contracted and agreed to proceed with the construction works on each necessary date and pay daily allowances.

C. Defendant B, upon obtaining permission for civil engineering works on the instant land, selected B as a civil engineering contractor for the instant land and completed the said civil engineering works.

The land in this case was divided on October 20, 2017 from the J, which was divided on October 20, 2017, is the sharing between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, and is currently being used as a road.

Before K divided on the same day, 153 square meters are owned by the plaintiffs and the defendants.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 2, 3, 6, 11, 12, each entry, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. Defendant B claimed KRW 1 million each of the unjust enrichment or damages amounting to the Plaintiff A, G, E, and F, demanded that the Plaintiff A, G, E, and F pay an amount of expenses incurred in carrying out administrative work for the purchase of land and civil engineering works for the long time, and obstructed the commencement of new housing construction works, and the said Plaintiffs paid KRW 1 million each to Defendant B on July 10, 2017, without verifying the expenses, etc. incurred in carrying out construction works as soon as possible.

However, the defendant B did not undertake administrative work for the construction of the above house or paid the cost.

Therefore, the above plaintiffs shall be deemed to have repaid their debts with no knowledge of their non-performance.