1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs falling under the following additional payment order.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the instant case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for a modification or addition as follows or an additional decision under paragraph (2). Thus, this is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of

The 5th 16, 18, 7th 10, 12, 8th 9, 10, and 9th 1 of the first instance judgment shall be amended to " February 25, 2014" respectively.

The 6th 18th 18th son of the first instance judgment shall be amended to “H”.

The following shall be added to the nine-dimensional sentence of the judgment of the first instance.

However, in light of the fact that the J, which arranged the instant sales contract around October 14, 2014, had an opportunity to sell the instant real estate to another person at the J’s request and to reduce damage to the said real estate, and that the decision to deny a loan was rendered by the Suhyup on November 7, 2014, it is reasonable to deem that the instant sales contract was rescinded at least around that time.

[] The 9th sentence, 7th sentence, 13, and 14th sentence of the first instance judgment of "the plaintiff shall revise the sales contract of this case to "the sales contract of this case".

The following shall be added to 7 pages 10 of the judgment of the court of first instance.

③ At the time of the preparation of the written consent to the sale and purchase, the Defendant failed to perform its obligations under the instant sales and purchase contract, and became automatically null and void, and became liable to the Plaintiffs for damages arising therefrom.

The plaintiffs did not have to obtain the consent of the defendant in order to conclude a contract with K for the instant real estate. However, as seen earlier, the J as the demand of K is above the defendant.