1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the ground for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional determination', and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of

2. The Plaintiffs asserted that the ownership of the instant building was acquired upon the completion of the construction of the instant building or the construction of the building as an independent building, and that the lease agreement entered into with the Defendant includes a parking lot site, etc., the Plaintiffs may exercise their right to demand the purchase of the instant building against the Defendant pursuant to Article 643 of the Civil Act, and may refuse to deliver the instant building until the Defendant offered a legitimate purchase price. However, as seen earlier, the instant lease agreement aims not to lease the building site for the purpose of owning the instant building, but to use and profit from the instant building, not to lease the building site for the purpose of owning the instant building, and the Plaintiffs merely extended or reconstructed the instant building by leasing it to the original acquisitor, as otherwise alleged,

Since there is no evidence to prove that the construction has been completed as an independent building, the above assertion by the plaintiffs on a different premise is without merit without further review.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the first instance is legitimate, and all appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.