1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning the instant case is as follows, except for the addition of the following “2. additional determination”, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. Article 20(2) of the service contract concluded between the Plaintiff’s assertion by the Defendants and the Defendant AHousing Reconstruction Association Establishment Promotion Committee (hereinafter “Defendant Promotion Committee”) provides that the Plaintiff may waive the loan and may not raise any objection against the Defendant Promotion Committee if the project is not implemented due to a change in the relevant statutes, such as natural disasters or change of policies, etc. in the process of implementing the project.

However, in the process of promoting the project by the Defendant Promotion Committee, ① the method of formulating the rearrangement plan was changed by the amendment of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance to directly establish the competent autonomous Gu from the resident proposal type, ② the application for the designation of the rearrangement zone was requested or rejected by the competent authority to supplement the application and delayed the project implementation. ③ In particular, the Seoul Special Metropolitan City’s “the direction for managing and coordinating the Seoul Special-Purpose Area” was revised on December 10, 2012, making it difficult for the Seoul Special-Purpose Area to change the final direction of the special-purpose area (e.g., changing the Class 2 general-purpose area to Class 3 general-use area) to the Class 3 general-use area, the Defendant Promotion Committee’s application for designation of the rearrangement zone and the residents’ public inspection was delayed, and ④ among them, it was impossible to implement the project ultimately due to the cancellation of the restriction on construction of the scheduled

Therefore, according to the above agreement, the obligation to return the loan of the defendant promotion committee was extinguished, and the joint and several liability obligation of the defendant B, C, D, and E, which is the joint and several liability of the defendant promotion committee, also extinguished.

(b).