1. The part concerning the designated parties in the attached Table 2 shall be dismissed among the lawsuits of Plaintiff (Appointed Party) A.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant Flag Development is an executor who newly constructed and sold “E shop” (hereinafter “instant shop”) on the ground D in the luminous time.

B. Plaintiffs A, Appointors F, and G (hereinafter “Bmers”) and Plaintiff B entered into a contract for the purchase of the store in this case from Defendant Franchis Development from March 2002 to May 2002 (hereinafter “instant contract for the sale of this case”) or took over their status from the buyers who entered into the said contract for the sale of this case.

At the time of entering into the instant sales contract, the buyers agreed as follows.

(1) The sale area per unit of a store shall be 16.53 square meters (5 square meters) and the specific number of houses shall be determined by the next public lottery, but if a store is allocated a size different from the sale area as a result of the lottery, it shall be adjusted later.

(2) The development of Defendant Flac may change the site area, improve the street facilities, change the entrances or entrances, or extend, rebuild, or alter any other facilities (including parking lots) in a building, and the buyers agree to change the building plan, change the size of the building and the site area, and change the location of auxiliary facilities.

Because of the above reasons, even though the indication of the division line, the location of the facility, the design drawing, etc. of the building has been changed differently from the time of conclusion of the contract, the buyer does not raise an objection, such as cancellation

C. The result of the lake drawing on the store of the shopping mall of this case conducted between July 22, 2004 and July 24, 2004, the plaintiff A and the remaining designated persons were allocated each of the stores listed in the column of "the lottery result" in the attached Table 1, and the plaintiff B were allocated each of the stores listed in the attached Table 1, and the 1077 of the first floor.

Around August 19, 2004, Defendant Franchi Development stated that the area for exclusive use, the area for common use, and the total area for sale determined by Plaintiff A and the Plaintiff B, and the final sale price settled accordingly.