1. Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant)’s appeal against the principal lawsuit and counterclaim, Plaintiff C and D’s appeal, Plaintiff B, C and D’s appeal, and Plaintiff B, C and D.

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the allegations, etc. emphasized by the plaintiffs and the defendant in this court, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(However, the judgment on the primary claim of plaintiffs C and D, whose claim has been withdrawn, is excluded); 2. Additional determination

A. As to the Plaintiff A’s assertion, the relevant legal doctrine concerning the claim for cancellation of the sales contract due to the nonperformance of the contract (A) Of the contents of the apartment sales advertisement, the contents of the apartment sales advertisement, which are related to specific terms and conditions of transaction, such as appearance, quality, structure, etc. of the apartment, and are not deemed to have been able to claim performance of the contents of the contract under social norms, have the nature of the apartment sales advertisement as an inducement to subscribe. Therefore,

[Supreme Court Decision 2014Da24327, 24334, 24341, 24358, 24365, 24372 decided May 28, 2015 (hereinafter “2014Da24327”) are indicated only as “only”

b) In full view of the evidence duly adopted and examined in the first instance trial and the following circumstances that can be recognized as the whole as to the allegation of N Bank salesroom occupants in addition to the circumstances acknowledged in the first instance trial, even if the evidence additionally presented in the first instance trial was presented, it is insufficient to deem that the Defendant advertised that N Bank salesroom occupants in L, M, and J had been determined, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Meanwhile, even if the Defendant advertised N Bank's advertising that N Bank's salesroom occupants in I et al., in light of the aforementioned legal principles, it is merely of the nature as an invitation of offer, and thus, it is difficult to cancel the sales contract on the ground that the Defendant did not perform it. (1) Plaintiff A is liable for nonperformance of the contract.