1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant succeeding intervenor are all dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiffs asserted that the contract was concluded between the Defendant (Withdrawal) and the Korea Land Trust (hereinafter “Korea Land Trust”), and paid KRW 26,800,000,00 in total, including the down payment and the construction cost, to the Korea Land Trust (hereinafter “instant contract”).

At the time of the conclusion of the sales contract, the sales guidance staff displayed a bankruptcy-related bankruptcy-related plan of 84㎡ C with “2 complex” to the Plaintiffs, and explained that the above plan was a plan of 101 Do 905, and thus, the sales contract was concluded between the Plaintiffs and the Korea Land Trust with regard to the above “2 complex” of 84С and 101 Dong 905.

However, the structure of 101, 905, which the plaintiffs are expected to move into, is different from the above "2 complex" C, and the contract for the sale in this case was concluded on September 8, 2015, when the purpose of the trust business was fulfilled, the trust business was completed after the trust business was entrusted to the land trust in Korea. Accordingly, all rights and obligations regarding the trust business was comprehensively taken over from the land trust in Korea.

Inasmuch as the Plaintiffs were unable to execute the instant sales contract due to a cause attributable to them, the Plaintiffs cancel the instant sales contract by the delivery of the instant complaint, and seek for the payment of KRW 52,731,00,00 in total, including the down payment, the construction cost, and the penalty equivalent to the down payment, paid to the Defendant due to restitution, and the penalty equivalent to the down payment, 25,931,000, and damages for delay.

2. In full view of the following: (a) whether a sales contract was concluded between the plaintiffs and the defendant with a structure of 101 m2,000 square meters C apartment complex C, which has a structure of 84 m2,00 square meters C, the sales contract was concluded between the plaintiffs and the defendant; (b) comprehensively taking into account the following purport: (c) evidence No. 3; (d) witness D’s partial testimony; and (e) appraiser E’s written appraisal result, D, an employee of the sales agency of C apartment, provides the plaintiffs with sales guidance; and