1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 2013, the Plaintiffs entered into a contract with the Defendant on the attached sheet (hereinafter “instant contract”) and paid KRW 10,000,000 to the Defendant around that time.

B. On May 2, 2013 and the third day of the same month, the Plaintiffs sent a total of 20,000 mags of the original total of 17,840 mags of the original on June 17, 2013 and the 18th day of the same month. On July 9, 2013, the Plaintiffs sent a total of 26,72 mags of the original on August 27, 2013 and the 28th day of the same month.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion is that it is impossible for the defendant to remain the farm user fee of KRW 400 per original 1stma, 30,000, and 400 per original 1stma, for a year during which the contract period of the plaintiff's assertion is one year, and the defendant deceivings the plaintiffs.

In addition, even though the defendant should manage the head of the Tong under the contract of this case under the joint name or visit the head of the Tong one to two times a week for management and consultation, the plaintiffs suffered a loss equivalent to 41,508,000 won (including a performance bond of KRW 10,000) in violation of the contract of this case.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay each of the plaintiffs 15,00,000 won = ((20,000 won for damages of 10,000,000 won for performance guarantee) ¡À2) and damages for delay.

3. The following circumstances are established: (a) there is no dispute between the parties to the above determination and the statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4; or (b) comprehensively considered the purport of the entire pleadings; (c) the plaintiffs had been engaged in the work related to the raising of original farms prior to the contract of this case and visited original farms prior to the contract of this case to grasp the size, etc. of original farms; (b) the plaintiffs operated the original farm for one year, and paid 400 won per original farm using the original farm fee to the defendant; and (c) during one year of the contract of this case, the defendant acquired the original farm leased to D from the defendant for 230,000,000.