1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the Defendants ordered the Plaintiff to pay KRW 12,301,077,696 and its delay damages.

1. Scope of the judgment of this court;

A. In the first instance court, the Plaintiff filed a claim against the Defendants for damages due to the nonperformance of obligation by Defendant A Apartment Reconstruction Association (hereinafter “Defendant Association”), the Plaintiff’s claim for loans and the Plaintiff’s claim for refund of business expenses against the Defendant Union. The first instance court dismissed the claim for damages due to nonperformance of obligation, and partly accepted the claim for loans and the claim for refund of business expenses, considering that the substance of business expenses is the same as the loan.

As to this, the Plaintiff appealed only to the dismissed portion of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the Defendants appealed against the part against the Defendants.

B. The court of the first instance before remand determined as follows.

(However, the Plaintiff added 13,062,782,308 won out of the cited amount of the first instance court prior to remand, and the principal out of the quoted amount of the first instance court prior to remand is 12,301,07,696 won.

The loan amount of this case recognized by the first instance court and the first instance court prior to remand is KRW 10,372,012,940, and the project expense amount of this case is equal to KRW 6,987,865,096. However, among the cited amount of the first instance court prior to remand, the difference between the principal and the cited amount of the first instance court prior to remand was derived from the difference between the total amount of the interest and the delay damages incurred until May 17, 2012 (the difference between the interest and the date of calculation of delay damages) concerning the loan of this case and the project expenses (the date of commencement and the rate of annual rate applied).

As above, “principal of the cited amount of the first instance court was reduced as above in the court of the first instance prior to remand, and as seen below, only the Defendants were reversed and remanded the part of the judgment prior to remanding by filing an appeal. As such, the Defendants’ lost portion of the judgment prior to remanding was either “principal of the cited amount of the first instance court” and “the quoted amount of the court of the first instance prior to remand.”