1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasons why this court should explain concerning the judgment on the basic facts and the defense prior to the merits of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: the "Seoul Seocho-gu Seoul Seocho-gu D church (hereinafter "the instant church"); the "Seoul Seocho-gu D church in Seocho-gu") in Seocho-gu, Seoul" in the 2nd Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Do of the judgment of the court of first instance is as "the church in Seocho-gu (hereinafter "the instant church"); the "Seoul-gu church in Seocho-gu") in the 3th Ha 10th above is as stated in the corresponding part

2. Judgment on the merits

A. (1) The Defendant’s assertion (1) that the Plaintiff violated his duty by failing to provide rescue statements among the documents stated in the attached Table 1 as cited in the instant indirect compulsory performance decision. As such, the granting of the instant execution clause is lawful.

(2) The Plaintiff’s assertion ① contains drawings and specifications in the design documents (hereinafter “design documents”) among the documents indicated in the attached Table 1 List cited in the instant indirect compulsory performance decision, but the structural calculation statement does not include the scope of acceptance of the instant provisional disposition or indirect compulsory performance decision.

Therefore, the Plaintiff did not have the duty to provide rescue statements to the Defendants, and thus, the granting of the instant execution clause under a different premise is unlawful.

② Even if the structural calculation statement is included in the scope of acceptance of the instant indirect compulsory performance decision, the Plaintiff provided all 11 documents except for the structural calculation statement among the documents ordering the provision of paragraph (1) of the instant indirect compulsory performance decision, and the failure to provide the structural calculation statement cannot be deemed to be a cause attributable to the Plaintiff. Therefore, it should be deemed that the Plaintiff fulfilled all obligations under the instant indirect compulsory performance decision

③ Even if some breach of duty is acknowledged, in order to prevent the Defendants from carrying out the enormous pecuniary gain through the instant decision of indirect compulsory performance, the scope of liability due to the Defendants’ breach of duty is design documents.