1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Defendant-Counterclaim Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is (1) 42,357.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by this court is that part of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, including the judgment on the allegations and evidence of the parties added in the trial, is the same as that of the relevant part of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the case where the decision is made in accordance with the following Paragraph 2. Thus, it is acceptable as it is

2. Parts to be dried;

A. Of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part on the basic facts of paragraph (1) (section 6 of the text of the judgment) [based on recognition] column “A evidence 17” is added, and No. 1-D.

At the end of the port, “the above notification was delivered to the Defendant on February 10, 2017” shall be added.

B. Article 2 of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance

A. (2) Article 4(3) of the supply contract of this case (No. 9 of the judgment) provides that where each of the supply contracts of this case is terminated, the defendant shall return from the paid price less the principal and interest paid on behalf of the plaintiffs. Thus, the defendant shall offset the interest of the plaintiff A, 953, 148, 819, 836, interest of the plaintiff B, interest of the plaintiff C, interest of the plaintiff C, 9,797, 697, and interest of the plaintiff D, 10,409,868.

A person shall be appointed.

C. Article 2 of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance

B. (1) As to the cancellation of the contract due to the delay in the scheduled date of occupancy (No. 10-11 of the judgment), the respective supply contract of this case set forth the scheduled date of entry into the hotel of this case as October 2016, and Article 3(3) of the supply contract of this case set forth the facts that the plaintiffs may rescind each supply contract of this case where it is impossible to enter into the room within three months from the scheduled date of entry into the room due to the reasons attributable to the defendant.

However, on the other hand, the scheduled date of each supply contract of this case stated that "if it is somewhat altered according to the fairness, it will be later notified," and the defendant will make the plaintiffs the scheduled date of entrance room on October 21, 2016 and the scheduled date of entry room again on January 23, 2017.