1. Of the judgments of the first instance court, Plaintiff (Appointed Party) A, Appointed D, E, F, C, Plaintiff G, H, N,O, P, T, U.S.

1. The Plaintiffs asserted the cancellation of the sales contract concluded with the Defendant in the first instance trial, and thereafter restitution therefrom: (i) sale price; (ii) balcony expansion cost; (iii) refund of agency cost; and (iv) compensation for damages or restitution of unjust enrichment; and (v) penalty for cancellation of the sales contract, respectively.

(B) The first instance court accepted the sales price, penalty, and the extension cost of balcony, and dismissed all the remainder of agency cost and air conditioners construction cost.

Since only the defendant appealed against the above cited parts, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the sale price, penalty, and the cost of expanding balcony.

2. Basic facts

A. The parties to the case 1) The defendant is J Apartment-si I of the Kunsan-si (hereinafter "the apartment of this case").

housing associations established under the Housing Act and subordinate statutes to implement the construction project. K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”)

L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “L”) entered into a construction contract with the Defendant for the instant apartment construction project.

(2) The plaintiffs are the buyers who purchased the apartment of this case. The plaintiffs are the buyers who purchased the apartment of this case.

B. The Defendant and the instant apartment complex, from around 2012 to 2014, concluded a membership agreement with the designated parties to enter into a contract for the purchase and sale of goods, including D, E, F, Plaintiff G, H, N, P, R, S, Te, T, U, U, D, AD, AF, AF, AH, and AJ, to allocate each of the same subparagraph stated in the “object of Sale” column of the attached Table among the apartment buildings in the instant case.

However, after entering into a membership agreement, the status of a member was lost because it is confirmed that the member is not qualified.

Since then, on October 30, 2015, the aforementioned designated parties D, etc. enter the same subparagraph as stated in the original membership agreement with the defendant, L, and the union members in the attached Table “sale price” in which the amount of the same subparagraph is equivalent to the contributions of the union members.