1. The plaintiffs' appeals against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except that the second design modification date in the third column of the first instance judgment (BP building part) from March 24, 2008 to March 28, 2008 to “ March 28, 2008” is the same as stated in paragraph (1) of the first instance judgment. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

An abbreviationd name set forth in paragraph (1) of the first instance judgment shall also be used as it is.

2. Determination on this safety defense

A. The Defendants’ assertion A and the Plaintiff D drafted a letter of certification that they are responsible for all civil and criminal matters arising after the completion of the LA and the PA building and that they would not raise any objection to the Defendant G.

The above notarial deed constitutes an niverse agreement, and thus, it is unlawful to claim damages due to tort related to each building or to claim damages due to default on obligations against the Defendants, as it violates the niverse agreement.

B. In the case where there are different opinions on the validity or scope of the agreement, the agreement to bring a lawsuit is deemed to have generated significant legal effects, such as waiver of the right to claim a trial guaranteed under the Constitution to the parties to the lawsuit, and is valid as to the circumstances that can be anticipated at the time of the agreement. In the case where there are different opinions on the validity or scope

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da80449, Nov. 28, 2013). According to a case, even if a wide range of non-instigation agreement causes a serious illegal state that is unexpected due to a wide range of non-instigation agreement, there may be unfair consequences that require a considerable disadvantage under a contract without correction. Therefore, the content thereof must be carefully examined, and the determination of whether a non-prosecution agreement satisfies the requirements under a non-instigation agreement ought to be made in accordance with strict standards.

According to the descriptions of No. 5-1 and No. 2, each of them is examined.