1. The plaintiffs' respective claims against the defendants are dismissed in entirety.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant C owns each real estate listed in the separate sheet 1 to 12, and Defendant D owns the real estate listed in the separate sheet 13.

B. On June 23, 2016, the Defendants sold each real estate listed in the Plaintiffs and the separate sheet, and sold the purchase price at KRW 7 billion. However, the land price is KRW 6 billion, the tree price is KRW 1 billion, and the appraisal price is KRW 1 billion, and the contract deposit is paid at the time of concluding a contract, and the remainder of KRW 6.3 billion is paid on October 23, 2016 (hereinafter “instant contract”).

C. On June 22, 2016 and July 8, 2016, the Plaintiffs paid 700 million won down payment to the Defendants.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1, 2, and 3 (including virtual numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. In light of the Plaintiffs’ assertion, the determination of the price of trees must be premised on the implementation of the instant contract. As such, the Plaintiffs requested each of the Defendants to provide an appraisal report on July 2016 and October 21, 2016, which was before the remainder payment date, but did not receive an appraisal report from the Defendants, but the Plaintiffs filed an application for provisional disposition to preserve the source of claim for registration of ownership transfer under the instant contract with the Jeju District Court on December 2016, but was dismissed on December 8, 2016.

Since both the plaintiffs and the defendants have been neglected for a long period of time without a name in the provision or peremptory notice of performance for two years thereafter, the contract of this case shall be deemed to have been terminated impliedly, and the defendants shall jointly be liable to refund the down payment amount of KRW 700 million and damages for delay to the plaintiffs.

Preliminaryly, even if the contract of this case was rescinded by the plaintiffs' non-performance of obligation, the contract deposit that the plaintiffs paid to the defendants constitutes the estimated amount of damages and can be reduced in cases where the estimated amount of damages is excessive.