1. The part of the judgment of the first instance against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) E and F, among the part of the main claim against Plaintiff B, the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) E and F.

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s acceptance of the judgment is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the cases of adding or adding a part as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

An abbreviationd name established in the judgment of the first instance is also used below the same.

[Supplementary or supplementary parts] On the third page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "I" of the 6th sentence shall be added to "F".

On the fourth step of the first instance judgment, the third step "Dara" shall be applied to "fairly in accordance with fairness."

On the 9th of the first instance judgment, evidence “A No. 31” shall be added to the evidence presented in the third instance below.

The following shall be added in front of the "fact stated" in the first page of the judgment of the first instance.

Part 11 of the first instance judgment of "No evidence exists" in Part 14 of "No evidence" in Part 11 of "No 14 of the first instance judgment of "No 20th to 30th unit officetels", "No 20th to 30th unit office officetels", "the interior office of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the body of the

【. In addition, the Plaintiffs submitted evidence Nos. 37 and 39 to the effect that the height of the dunes structure presented in the instant officetel model house exceeds 1.5 meters. However, from among the persons who prepared the instant officetel No. 37, there is no person who correctly tested the height of the dunes structure at the time of the instant officetel model house visit, and as seen earlier, as long as the contract states that there is a little difference from the actual dunes height in order to assist the understanding of the dunes structure as seen earlier, even if the dunes structure exceeds 1.5 meters, it is difficult to evaluate Defendant E and F that they deceiving the Plaintiffs as if they were permitted to have the dunes structure of the instant officetel as if they were permitted to have the dunes structure of the dunes.

6. Meanwhile, the Plaintiffs are neglected.