1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 6, 2009, the plaintiffs filed a lawsuit against D and E (hereinafter referred to as "E") seeking payment of construction price under the Nanwon District Court Branch Branch Decision 2007Gahap7314, and the mediation was concluded that "D and E jointly shall pay to the plaintiff A 130 million won, and 95 million won to the plaintiff B by March 31, 2009, respectively, and if the above date exceeds the above date, the damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the following day to the day of full payment."

(hereinafter referred to as the "Mediation of this case").

Plaintiff

A under the instant protocol on May 14, 2015, based on the instant protocol, the debtor E and the third obligor were served on the Defendant and the claim amount of KRW 288,983,607, and A received a seizure and collection order against “the claim for construction cost to be paid from the Defendant (the owner of the building after the change) after E newly constructing the F G on the ground in Suwon-gu, Suwon-si, Suwon-si, and the Defendant (the owner of the building after the change),” and the said order was served on the Defendant on May 19, 2015.

C. On May 14, 2015, pursuant to the instant protocol, Plaintiff B received a seizure and collection order against “the claim for construction cost to be paid by the Defendant (the owner after the change)” with the debtor E, a third debtor, the Defendant, and the claim amount of KRW 211,180,328, based on the instant protocol of mediation, regarding “the claim for construction cost to be paid by the Defendant (the owner after the change)” (this court 2015TT 6356), and the said order was served on the Defendant on May 19, 2015.

In the real estate compulsory auction case, including Suwon District Court H, Plaintiff A received 67,773,505 won, and Plaintiff B received 71,162,179 won, respectively.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1, 2, 3 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiffs' assertion E and D contracted the above new G construction from the defendant (the representative director I at that time) on January 8, 1999, and completed the construction by awarding a contract to J Co., Ltd. (hereinafter "J") even after E and D became the owner, so the defendant who was returned to the owner of the building shall be the owner of E and D who completed the construction.