beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On the ground of Mapo-gu Seoul, Seoul, there was multi-household housing where S et al. reside, and there was multi-household housing where U et al. reside on the ground of Mapo-gu Seoul, Seoul, but the above multi-household housing residents, including S et al., decided to remove the above multi-household housing and build the apartment. On October 14, 2002, the aforementioned multi-household housing residents, including S et al., obtained a building permit from the head of Mapo-gu Seoul, and obtained a building permit from the head of Seoul, Mapo-gu. On June 29, 2003, the building of multi-household housing with steel structure with the size of 6th above the ground level on the above site (hereinafter
B. On May 10, 2004, S and 14 other than S entered into a rebuilding contract with the content that they will acquire the remainder of the household in lieu of the construction cost by newly constructing an apartment with a loan of KRW 2.58 billion in the construction cost (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”).
C. Since then, only some residents, including S, V, and W, intend to continue a reconstruction project, four persons, including V and W, acquired a divided X site from the said T site on June 23, 2004. On June 29, 2004, the Down case acquired two co-owners of the said X site except S, with the exception of S, the share of co-owners of the said R, and V and W, completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day, and completed the registration of ownership transfer from W. On the same day, the Y site adjoining each of the above sites was purchased from W.
Due to financial problems, the apartment construction of this case did not properly progress, and the defendant N agreed to settle the construction cost by finishing the remaining construction work with the defendant N who was in charge of the construction of the stone facility of the apartment of this case, and the defendant N is himself and S on May 24, 2004.