1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Presumed factual basis

A. On November 1, 2010, Plaintiff A entered into a sales contract with H to sell part of the land equivalent to KRW 360 million in the amount of KRW 496,00,000,00 among the 357 square meters and J-forested Forest Land (hereinafter “each of the instant lands”) owned by the Plaintiff, in order to divide the said land into 357 square meters and KRW 296,000,000.

(C) On January 28, 201, the Plaintiffs concluded a new sales contract with a view to jointly purchasing KRW 605.4 square meters in total at KRW 439,200,000,000, in addition to the 109.4 square meters in each of the instant land from H on January 28, 2011.

(hereinafter “the second sale contract”) Accordingly, on May 19, 201, the registration of transfer of shares in the names of the plaintiffs was completed with respect to the above purchase portion of each of the above lands.

B. At the time of the second sale contract, the land purchased by the Plaintiffs was designated as “Class 1 general residential area” within the “Class 1 general residential area” under the National Land Planning and Utilization Act and the Enforcement Decree thereof, and the “Class 1 general residential area” within the “K Class 1 general residential area” as of the time of the second sale contract. In the case of all buildings other than detached houses in accordance with the Municipal Ordinance of the City/Do, the said construction

C. On July 21, 201, while promoting the business of constructing a new apartment on the said purchased land, the Plaintiffs heard the answer from the government market on July 21, 201 to the effect that “the above land is not allowed to construct a multi-family housing because it fails to meet the aforementioned road adjoining requirements.”

In addition, when the plaintiffs applied for a building permit to establish multi-family housing on the ground of each of the instant land, the Speaker’s Government admitted each of the instant land on September 23, 201, on the ground that it is not possible to enter into multi-family housing due to the lack of access to at least eight meters on the roads. D.

Accordingly, the plaintiffs newly constructed a single (multi-household) house which is not a multi-family housing on the above purchased land, and on April 26, 2012, the plaintiffs registered the preservation of ownership.