1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall make 5,482. 5,482 to the plaintiff (appointed parties) and the appointed parties C respectively.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, and this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where part of the judgment of the court of first instance is used as follows. Thus, this is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. Parts to be dried;

(a) 6th to 6th of the judgment of the first instance court shall be followed by the following:

Since the defendant's wrong purchase of the non-profit real estate that does not belong to the redevelopment target area by the plaintiffs, the defendant is liable for damages suffered by the plaintiffs. Since the plaintiffs purchased the real estate of this case which does not exceed KRW 150 million within the scope of 192 million within the scope of 100,000,000,000 won, the difference shall be the sum of KRW 42 million and KRW 3 million within the scope of 45,000,000 paid by the plaintiffs, the plaintiff shall seek compensation for damages according to the plaintiffs' shares.

(b) Forms 10, 4, and 12, of the first instance judgment shall be followed as follows.

When calculating the damages suffered by the plaintiffs, all of the following circumstances were reflected:

The fact that the plaintiffs purchased the real estate of this case in KRW 192 million in the market value of the real estate of this case to be established by the Commission was seen earlier, and it is evident that the plaintiffs would not purchase the real estate of this case without the defendant's brokerage and would have not paid KRW 192 million in the purchase price.

However, it is recognized that the plaintiffs currently have ownership of the land of this case and also have the right to dispose of the building of this case on its ground. Thus, the scope of compensation for damages of this part is the difference between the real value of the above real estate at the time of the above sales contract from the sales price of the real estate of this case paid by the plaintiffs. According to the result of the appraisal commission of appraiser V by the court of the first instance, the contract of this case around April 2, 2015