1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The scope of this court’s judgment in the first instance court rendered a claim for damages against the Defendant, ① a claim for return of down payment to the Plaintiff B, ② the claim for return of down payment, and the court of first instance accepted the claim for return of down payment and dismissed all the claims for damages.

As to this, only the plaintiffs appealed, and since the defendant did not appeal, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the damages claim part of the plaintiffs.

2. Facts of recognition;

A. The Seoul Mapo-gu Seoul Mapo-gu D. D. 76 square meters and the three-story neighborhood living facilities and multi-family houses (two-households) (hereinafter “instant real estate”) are owned by the Defendant and his kyllog E in share of 1/2.

B. On June 9, 2014, the Plaintiffs concluded a contract with the Defendant to purchase the instant real estate at KRW 475 million from the Defendant and E.

(hereinafter “instant sales contract”). C.

In the instant sales contract, the name of the Defendant and E is indicated as the seller, and the intermediate payment of KRW 70 million on the date of the contract, and the intermediate payment of KRW 70 million is paid until June 20, 2014, and the remainder of KRW 365 million is paid until August 8, 2014.

In addition, the special agreement provides that "it shall be responsible for and prepared for the documents for sale of E, the joint name, until the payment of the remaining amount is made," and the other party may cancel the contract and claim damages for the amount equivalent to the contract deposit.

On June 19, 2014, E sent a certificate of content to the Plaintiff to the Plaintiff, and expressed the intent to cancel the instant sales contract. On June 27, 2014, the Plaintiff expressed his/her intent to demand the reimbursement of the down payment, as the Plaintiff unilaterally requested the Defendant and E to cancel the contract before the intermediate payment is paid by the seller.

On June 30, 2014, the Defendant’s instant case is no longer than the Plaintiff’s text messages.