1. The judgment of the first instance court, including the claims extended and added in the trial, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant.

1. The reasoning for the explanation in this part of the basic facts is as stated in the part of “1. Basic Facts” from No. 11 to No. 18 of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. In calculating the pre-sale conversion price of the instant apartment, the Defendant calculated the pre-sale conversion price at an amount exceeding the reasonable pre-sale conversion price pursuant to the standard under the Rental Housing Act related statutes, which is a mandatory provision as follows.

Therefore, since each sales contract of this case is invalid in excess of the legitimate pre-sale conversion price, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiffs the difference between the pre-sale conversion price calculated by return of unjust enrichment and the pre-sale conversion price properly determined.

1) Although the construction cost, which forms the basis for the calculation of the construction cost, should be calculated on the basis of the “actual construction cost,” the Defendant calculated on the basis of the “standard construction cost”, which is merely a presentation of the upper limit price. 2) In calculating the housing site cost, which forms the basis for the calculation of the pre-sale conversion price of the instant apartment, the Defendant calculated on the basis of the “standard construction cost.” However, the Defendant calculated the housing site cost at 10% of the development cost, even though it

3. Although the above housing site cost should be calculated at the actual development cost rather than the estimated development cost, the defendant calculated the housing site cost without excluding KRW 31,683,145,000, which was not actually borne or executed among urban infrastructure charges appropriated in the cost of the housing site development project in the housing site development project district in this case.

B. The Defendant’s claim for damages against tort violates the standard for calculating the pre-sale conversion price under the Rental Housing Act and other relevant statutes.