1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant and the defendant succeeding intervenor were dismissed in entirety.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. On November 27, 2001, the Defendant constructed a non-permanent apartment (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on the ground of the 1762 ground of Gangseo-si, Gangnam-si, and completed the registration of ownership preservation, and leased the instant apartment to the Plaintiffs as the publicly constructed rental house.

B. Upon the lapse of the five-year rental period for the apartment of this case, the Defendant concluded a sales contract with the Plaintiffs on the date of the contract indicated in the separate sheet No. 42. A and 90. B, with the exception of Plaintiff 42. The date of the contract indicated in the separate sheet No. 42. The Defendant’s successor entered into the sales contract for each apartment of this case indicated in the corresponding “Dong, Dong, lake column” as stated in the separate sheet No. 42. A and 90. B, and the Defendant and the Defendant’s successor received the sales price in full from the Plaintiffs.

C. In determining the pre-sale conversion price at the time, the Defendant calculated the housing price at the time of the initial recruitment of occupants, one of the elements for calculating the pre-sale conversion price at the time, based on the “building cost” and “housing site cost,” and the construction cost was the standard construction cost in accordance with the notification of the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs, and the housing site cost was the acquisition price

The Defendant’s succeeding intervenor was divided and established by the Defendant on December 30, 2009, and accordingly succeeded to all rights and obligations regarding housing projects from the Defendant, thereby succeeding to all rights and obligations regarding the instant apartment.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence No. 174 in the evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. Although the Defendant and the Defendant’s successor calculated the pre-sale conversion price of the instant apartment, the construction cost should be calculated as actual construction cost, they applied the “standard construction cost” announced by the Minister of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs

The Defendant and the Intervenor succeeding to the Defendant present this case.