1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs are parties 1) The apartment of the N'N' regional housing association (hereinafter "the apartment of this case") to be newly built on the land of Seongbuk-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government M.

2) The tentatively named Association (hereinafter referred to as the tentatively named Association) shall be

(2) The Defendant Dom chip Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Dom chip”) is a company that entered into a partnership agency service agreement with the instant provisional name and takes charge of the sale of the instant apartment complex and the recruitment of its members, and the Defendant Dom chip Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Dom chip”) entered into a business agreement with Defendant Dom chip to select the Defendant as the contractor of the instant apartment complex as the construction of the instant apartment complex, and will be a company that will be newly built as a future, by entering into a construction agreement with Defendant Dom chip.

B. The plaintiffs join the association and enter into an association agency contract of this case between the tentative name cooperative and the defendant Dom chip on the date of each of the pertinent contracts listed in the attached list (1). The plaintiffs join the tentative name cooperative of this case and paid the union members' contributions and business promotion expenses, etc., and purchase one household of the apartment of this case (34 square meters on a supplied size of 112 square meters) on the date of each of the pertinent contracts listed in the attached list (1). However, the "O housing association joining the association and the association agency contract of this case" (hereinafter referred to as the "each of the contracts of this case").

2) Each of the instant contracts was signed and sealed respectively by the instant association as the executor, Defendant Dono chips as the executor, Defendant Dono chips as the executor, and Defendant Dono chips as the contractor.

The main contents of each contract of this case are as follows.

Some plaintiffs-related contracts are submitted only as evidence under Article 9, but it seems that the contents after Article 10 were omitted in the process of submitting evidence.