1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Facts of recognition

around April 2016, the Defendants newly built a multi-household H (hereinafter “multi-household housing in this case”) on the F and G ground of Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu, Seoul.

The multi-household housing in this case consists of 8 households with 2 to 5 floors each of the two households above ground.

From June 2016, the Defendants illegally expanded the area of the 17m square meters of the 4th floor I (hereinafter “instant subparagraph I”) among multi-household housing in the instant case (hereinafter “instant multi-household housing”), and illegally expanded the area of the 12m square meters of the 5th floor J (hereinafter “instant J”).

(hereinafter “The illegal expansion area of Jhoho” and “the illegal expansion area of this case” is referred to as “the illegal expansion area of each case of this case. The head of Seodaemun-gu, around 2016, issued a corrective order to voluntarily correct each of the illegal expansion areas of this case to the Defendants, and issued a non-performance penalty.

On March 4, 2017, the Defendants concluded a sales contract of KRW 250,00,00 for the Plaintiff A and B, and completed the registration of ownership transfer for each of 1/2 shares on July 7, 2017 (hereinafter “instant I sales contract”); and on July 10, 2017, concluded a sales contract of KRW 197,00,000 for the instant subparagraph with the Plaintiff C with respect to the instant subparagraph (J); and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 31, 2017.

(2) On August 31, 2017, Plaintiff C completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of the trust with respect to the instant subparagraph (hereinafter “K”) to K Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K”) on August 31, 2017.

Plaintiff

A, B, and the Defendants entered into the instant I purchase and sale contract, and they agreed to perform extended construction works, such as piling up external walls and covering the roof, on the grounds that the construction cost is borne by the Defendants.

On July 24, 2017, the above plaintiffs are deemed to have known of the following facts at the expense of the defendants.