1. The part concerning the principal lawsuit in the judgment of the court of first instance was added or expanded by the plaintiff (a counterclaim defendant) at the trial.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Status 1 of the Parties) The Plaintiffs are Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government H Land (hereinafter “instant land”).

(2) The Defendant Company is a contractor that newly constructed a building on the first class neighborhood living facilities and multi-family housing on the instant land in size of the second class underground floor and the fourth class above ground (hereinafter “instant building”) and the Defendant G is the representative director of the Defendant Company.

B. 1) Plaintiff A, B, D, and Non-Party K (Plaintiff E acquires the contractual status of K) as there is no dispute between the parties as to the fact that Plaintiff A, B, D, and Non-Party K (Plaintiff E takes over the contractual status of K, and thus, Plaintiff E is not distinguished from K and Plaintiff E, and “Plaintiff E”.

On July 1, 2014, the Defendant Company and the Defendant Company newly constructed the instant building consisting of one household of neighborhood living facilities and eight apartment units on the instant land; ② the Defendant Company concluded a construction contract with one household of neighborhood living facilities (Mho Lake); the Plaintiffs have two households of collective housing (Plaintiffs A: Qho, No. B, Nho, T, Plaintiff D:Oho, U, and Rho; ③ the Defendant Company as a share of the construction cost, with the share of the construction cost, KRW 180 million for Plaintiff A; KRW 220 million for Plaintiff B; KRW 220 million for Plaintiff D; and KRW 180 million for Plaintiff E, respectively (hereinafter the instant construction contract is referred to as “instant construction contract”).

On the other hand, the documents in which the instant construction contract was documented (No. 3, V house rebuilding contract (hereinafter “instant construction contract”), as well as the plaintiffs, specify “four persons, such as AG,” as the parties to the contract. The plaintiffs appear to have newly constructed the Jdong building and four persons, such as AG, etc., respectively. In this case, both the plaintiffs and the defendant company are separate from the construction contract for the Jdong building and the Zdong building.