1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following cases. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary part] On 4th 14th 14th 2th 4th 14th 7th 7th 196, “an appraiser G” means “an appraiser G by the first instance court appraiser G” (hereinafter “appraisal G”).

The first instance judgment of 4th 16th 16th "this prior contract for a second construction" shall be "the second construction contract of this case".

The last 4th parallel of the judgment of the court of first instance is called "Witness H" as "Witness H of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as "Witness H")."

From 5th of the first instance judgment to 20th of the same eth of the same eths as follows.

2. Determination on the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion 1) The contract amount stipulated in the construction contract of this case was 408,00,000, including value-added tax. However, the defendant received a total of KRW 635,380,000 from the plaintiffs due to the construction price under the construction contract of this case, and received an excessive payment of the difference of KRW 227,380,000. Therefore, the defendant is obliged to pay the plaintiffs the amount of KRW 113,690,000 (=227,380,000) by return of unjust enrichment ± 227,380,000) and delay damages therefrom. 2) The plaintiffs are additionally constructed 4 units with the defendant, and the second and third floors were installed on the central steel frame of the second and third floors, and the construction contract of this case was concluded to pay the unit price calculated in the construction contract of this case as stipulated in the construction contract of this case.

However, the reasonable construction cost applied to the unit price stipulated in the instant construction contract is KRW 144,804,00. The Defendant claimed against the Plaintiffs by lowering the unit price of the second floor and the steel plate of each second floor of the second and third floors, and the Plaintiffs paid KRW 166,930,00 to the Defendant.