All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The lower court rejected the Plaintiffs’ claim for damages due to non-issuance of the tax invoice, on the ground that there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Plaintiffs paid additional costs in addition to KRW 400 million for the construction of the instant building, and even if there were construction costs additionally required, it is difficult to recognize that the Defendants agreed to issue the tax invoice to the Plaintiffs.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and the record, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the input tax amount of the building of this case, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical

Other grounds of appeal are with respect to the determination of the family register of the court below. Thus, unless the judgment of the court below was erroneous, the propriety of the family register determination cannot affect the conclusion of the judgment, and it cannot be accepted without the need for further determination.

2. The lower court rejected this part of the Plaintiffs’ claim on the ground that the terms and conditions of a lease agreement concluded between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants are not sufficient to deem that the Defendants are obliged to renew the contract after the termination of the lease agreement.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the interpretation of a lease agreement, contrary to what is alleged in

3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.