1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On June 27, 2014, Plaintiff B received the registration of ownership transfer from G from the former owner on the grounds of sale on May 20, 2014 with respect to building E, F, and its ground (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and the transaction value was reported as KRW 3.5 million.

B. On June 27, 2014, the Plaintiffs paid KRW 1,615,00,000,000,000,000,000,000 as the purchase price of the instant real estate on July 3, 2014, and paid KRW 160,000,000,000,000 to the Defendants, around September 22, 2014.

(1.0 million won was paid and thereafter returned to the plaintiffs).

Around July 3, 2014, a real estate sales contract was made between Plaintiff B and Defendant D with respect to the instant real estate, with a purchase price of KRW 480 million (a balance of KRW 10 million, KRW 170 million, KRW 170 million, KRW 150 million, and KRW 150 million, KRW 150 million, and KRW 150 million).

On July 10, 2014, the Plaintiffs completed the registration of modification of the right to collateral security, which changed the debtor to A, on the ground of acceptance of the contract, with respect to the right to collateral security established on the instant real estate, and the debtor G’s right to collateral security, and changed the maximum debt amount to KRW 396 million on July 31, 2017.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 5 (including additional number), the purport of whole pleading

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendants, between the Plaintiff’s arguments, deceptioned the Plaintiffs that the instant real estate of KRW 350 million was KRW 480,000,000,000, which was the market price of KRW 350,000,000, and due to such unlawful acts, the Plaintiffs incurred damages exceeding KRW 120,000,000,000,000

In addition, it is invalid to conclude a sales contract again even after the plaintiff B had already acquired ownership by transfer. Therefore, the KRW 120 million paid based on the contract should be returned as unjust enrichment.