1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. Basic facts

A. Construction of the instant apartment and registration of ownership preservation 1) H Co., Ltd. (I Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) is a “land owner” in total of the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) who owned the land J, K, L, L, M, N, andO on March 28, 2003, Jongno-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government J, K, L, M, N, and Q (hereinafter “A, E, F, P, and Q

The apartment building of 20 households above the above land (hereinafter “the apartment building of this case”) was newly constructed, and the non-party company agreed that the 13 households except the 7 households designated by the land owners among the above apartment buildings of this case shall be paid in kind to the non-party company as the price for the construction. 2) The non-party company completed almost the apartment building of this case on November 2003, but did not complete the construction thereafter. However, the national bank, the creditor company of this case, provisionally attached the E shares among the individual households of this case (Seoul Central District Court 2006Kadan80127), and registered the preservation of ownership in the name of the land owners as to the individual households of this case, upon the commission of the court on November 16, 2006.

(1/5 shares of each land owner). (b)

In around 207, land owners filed a lawsuit seeking delivery of buildings (Seoul Central District Court 2007Gahap83361, hereinafter "the first extradition lawsuit") against the buyers (including Defendant B) who asserted that the apartment of this case was sold in lots by the non-party company and the construction business operators who asserted that the apartment of this case was sold in lots by the non-party company. 2) The land owners filed a lawsuit claiming delivery of buildings (hereinafter "the first extradition lawsuit") against the persons who occupied the individual households of this case at the time when the apartment of this case was sold in lots.

In the above lawsuit, Defendant B asserted that “The sales contract (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) was concluded on November 12, 2004 between the company outside the country and the company outside the country, as stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “503”).”

3. The court has the authority to sell or lease subparagraph 503 to the company outside the jurisdiction of the court on February 18, 2009.