1. The plaintiff's claim against the defendants is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Defendant B’s ownership of the size of 683 square meters and 340 square meters prior to E, the foregoing D’s site for warehouse in Jeonju-gun, Jeonju-gun, and the general warehouse of 196 square meters at the 1st floor of a single-story storage of reinforced concrete structure on the ground of D’s land (hereinafter the above warehouse is referred to as “instant warehouse”; and each of the above real estate is jointly owned by the Defendants.

B. On the instant warehouse, approximately 3 square meters of toilets as affiliated buildings and ancillary facilities were extended without permission from stairs going up on the septic tank and rooftop (hereinafter collectively referred to as “the instant illegal extension section”), and two containers for residential use were installed on the rooftop, and the roof was installed at approximately 30 square meters of a warehouse with a tent.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant annexed buildings and facilities” in total of illegally extended parts, 2 containers, and warehouses with roof tents.

On August 4, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with the Defendants as a broker of the F Licensed Real Estate Agent Office with respect to the instant real estate and the instant affiliated buildings and facilities at KRW 197 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”), and paid the down payment of KRW 10 million on the contract date, and paid the remainder on October 1, 2015.

According to the instant sales contract, each of the instant real estate and the instant appurtenant buildings and facilities shall be sold in a lump sum according to the current facilities (Article 1 and 4 of the Special Agreement), but the Defendants were deemed to bring two containers to the Defendants.

(Article 6 of the Special Agreement). In addition, if one party fails to perform the contract, the other party may notify in writing and cancel the contract, but the contract deposit shall be based on the compensation for the damage.

(Article 6. D.)

However, after the conclusion of the contract of this case, the plaintiff raised an objection on the ground that the illegal extension of this case was extended without permission. The defendants are also the defendants.