1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiffs’ contract 1) Plaintiff B entered into with D on September 25, 2014, the entire 143.79 square meters (hereinafter “instant commercial building”) of the 1st floor of the E-ground commercial building in Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Seoan-gu, Incheon (hereinafter “instant commercial building”).

2) The premium agreement on goodwill and facilities in the instant commercial building (hereinafter referred to as “the premium agreement on goodwill”) to the effect that the goodwill and facilities in the instant commercial building will be acquired KRW 1550 million for goodwill (hereinafter referred to as “the premium agreement on goodwill”).

(2) Plaintiff B paid KRW 15 million to D, September 25, 2014, and KRW 140 million on October 6, 2014, respectively, in accordance with the instant premium agreement. (2) Plaintiff A leased the instant commercial building from F, the owner of the said building, as the lease period from October 3, 2014 to October 6, 2016, KRW 5.2 million.

(hereinafter “instant lease agreement”). The Plaintiff A brought KRW 133,290,300 into the instant commercial building and started operating the business with the trade name “G”.

B. (1) Defendant C, who is a public official of the Seo-gu Office in Seoan City, was reported a civil petition on the instant commercial building on March 2, 2011 and controlled the site. Defendant C at the time, the part of the assembly type warehouse of the structure of the sandbrid board structure and the indoor parking lot site of this case 22.68 square meters (hereinafter “indoor parking lot site of this case”).

(2) On March 7, 2011, and May 11, 2011, the head of the Seo-gu Northern District issued a corrective order to voluntarily remove 64.53 square meters including the site of the indoor parking lot in this case to D without permission.

3) At that time, Defendant D removed only the parts of the above prefabricated building except the site of the instant indoor parking lot, and contact Defendant C with the execution of the corrective order. Nevertheless, Defendant C confirmed on June 3, 201 whether D actually complied with the corrective order at the site around June 3, 201.

The defendant C is in its process.