1. The Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) provided real estate stated in attached Table No. 1 to the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) A, and the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).

1. Comprehensively taking account of the respective descriptions and the overall purport of arguments as to the cause of the principal claim, the Defendants concluded a sales contract to purchase each real estate listed in the separate sheet from the Central Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Central Construction”) on May 17, 2007 (hereinafter “Central Construction”), and the Defendants possessed each real estate listed in the separate sheet; the Central Construction Co., Ltd. did not pay the purchase price on July 17, 2014; and the Central Construction Co., Ltd sold the real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the separate sheet to the Plaintiff on August 1, 2014; and the Plaintiffs sold each real estate listed in paragraph (2) of the separate sheet to the Plaintiff on August 4, 2014; and the Plaintiffs paid the purchase price and completed the registration procedure for transfer of ownership on each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

According to the above facts of recognition, the defendants are obliged to deliver each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiffs who are owners, as they possess the real estate without title.

2. The Defendants’ determination on the grounds of defense and counterclaim by the Defendants had the right to retain each real estate listed in the separate sheet based on the above construction cost claim, asserting that the Defendants had been in progress with electricity, heating, etc. in an unsold housing unit at the time when possession was commenced by purchasing each real estate listed in the separate sheet from central construction, and that they cannot respond to the Plaintiffs’ request for extradition, and thus, they sought construction cost of KRW 100 million as a counterclaim, and there is no evidence to support that the Defendants had been performing construction as above. Thus, the Defendants’ assertion on defense and counterclaim by the Defendants is without merit.

3. According to the conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims for counterclaim are justified, and the defendants' claims for counterclaim are without merit.