1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance against Defendant Espwon Co., Ltd., V, W, X, AA, and H shall be revoked.

2.Annex.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows: the court's determination on the claim against Defendant Q Q Q Q Q Q corporation among the judgment of the court of first instance on the claim against Defendant A, as in "2. Determination on the claim against Defendant A Q Q corporation"; the judgment on the claim against Defendant A, V, X, X, AA, and AH as in "3. Determination on the claim against Defendant A," and the judgment on the claim against Defendant A, V,W, X, AA, and AH as in the main part of the judgment of the court of first instance as in "A. Determination on the claim against Defendant A," and the prior defense against Defendant R, S, T, T, sexual telecommunications, and Dae Special Construction, as in the main part of the judgment of the court of first instance as in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, shall be cited as in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant Qua corporation

A. Defendant Q Q Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant Q”) asserts to the effect that it is unlawful to seek confirmation of the absence of a lien on the building of this case as there is no benefit of confirmation, since it is an effective and appropriate means for the Plaintiffs to seek direct performance, such as seeking delivery of the building of this case, to remove the risks or apprehensions in the current rights or legal status of the Plaintiffs.

B. The benefit of confirmation is recognized when a judgment of confirmation is rendered at the time of the most effective means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s rights or legal status’s current apprehensions and risks, and the filing of a lawsuit for confirmation is not a final solution of a dispute, and thus there is no benefit of confirmation.

In full view of the above evidence and the purport of the entire pleadings, Defendant Q from March 8, 2014 to the instant case.