All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant, including the part arising from the supplementary participation.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court determined that the Plaintiffs’ claim against the Defendant for removal of the instant building and delivery of the instant site did not constitute an abuse of rights.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the legal status of a purchaser of real estate, as otherwise in the grounds of appeal.

2. The lower court, based on its stated reasoning, did not err in fulfilling its obligations under the instant sales contract by the deceased’s husband and wife.

or the refusal of its implementation. The court determined that it was not possible to deem the refusal of its implementation.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal principles on performance, the unity of a sales contract, and the delay and refusal of performance as stated in the grounds of appeal.

3. The Defendant’s final appeal is without merit, and all of its final appeals are dismissed, and the costs of final appeal are assessed against the Defendant, including the part arising from the participation in the appeal. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent