1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked, and the plaintiff (appointed party) shall be entitled to the revoked part.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the facts is as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as stated in Article 420 of the same Act, with the exception of the dismissal of each corresponding part as follows.

Part 2: “A evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 7, and 8” in Part 16 shall be deemed to be “Evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 7, 8, 1, 1, 2, and 9” and “Approval from the Minister of Construction and Transportation on Nov. 22, 1993 for a housing site development plan for the Daejeon District B (the approval of the revision to the project plan was obtained on May 11, 1994)” shall be deemed to be “Approval for a housing site development plan for the Daejeon District B (the approval of the revision to the project plan was obtained on May 11, 1994)” and Article 1(d) shall be deleted, “The approval of the construction project plan is obtained from the Minister of Construction and Transportation on Jul. 2, 1994.

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. In selling the instant apartment, the Plaintiff calculated the selling price by applying the standard construction cost publicly notified by the Minister of Construction and Transportation, which is merely the upper limit line, instead of the construction cost, and calculated the sale price by applying 80% of the construction cost of the housing site development project in accordance with the guidelines for the management of the housing site development project, and calculated the sale price by applying 100% of the construction cost of the housing site in accordance with the guidelines for the management of the housing site development project, and thereby exceeding the legitimate pre-sale conversion price prescribed by relevant Acts and subordinate statutes, such as the Rental Housing Act at the time of conversion of sale. As such, the portion exceeding the legitimate pre-sale conversion price in each of the instant sales contracts is null and void, and the Defendant shall return to the Plaintiff and the designated parties the amount indicated in the “amount of unjust enrichment” column 1 of the attached Table 1, which is the difference between the purchase price and the purchase price properly calculated.

B. At the time of the first invitation of occupants of the apartment of this case.