All appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for adding the following judgments as to the newly asserted matters in the court of first instance, and thus, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of first instance. Thus, the court of first instance cites it as it is (including the attached Form) by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act. 2. Additional determination

A. 1) The plaintiffs asserted that the appraisal result is unfair. At the time of the appraisal conducted in the first instance trial, the 2,3 floors of the plaintiffs' buildings were excluded from the assessment of defect repair cost without any specific grounds. Thus, the above appraisal result is unfair.

2) We examine the following facts and circumstances, i.e., the approval date of the use of the plaintiffs' building was 44 years or more from the date of appraisal ( August 21, 2019) as at the time of appraisal (2) as at the time of appraisal (2) as at the time of appraisal, unless the appraisal methods, etc. were so erroneous as to be contrary to the empirical rule or unreasonable (see Supreme Court Decision 201Da103199, Jan. 24, 2013, etc.). The above evidence and the first instance court’s factual inquiry into the facts as to the first architectural office, which were acknowledged by adding the whole purport of oral argument to the whole purport of the arguments, and (3) as at the time of appraisal (excluding the approval date of the use of the plaintiffs’ building was April 23, 1975; 3) as at the time of appraisal, the appraisal period of the first floor was 50 years or more, while the second and third floors were considerably excluding the appraisal cost from the object of repair.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' above assertion is without merit.

B. Determination 1 on the assertion that the limitation of liability is not permissible is that the Plaintiffs are the old age of the Plaintiffs’ building by the first instance trial appraiser.