1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

(b).

1. The court's explanation of this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for dismissal or addition as set forth below 2, and thus, citing this case by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On the fourth page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part to be rejected or added, which reads “the agreement of this case” as “the agreement of this case” (hereinafter referred to as “the agreement of this case”) and reads “the agreement of this case” and reads “the agreement of this case” prepared at the time of the agreement of this case.

The June 21th of the first instance judgment (hereinafter referred to as “instant agreement”) shall be deleted, and the July 1st “instant agreement” shall be deemed to read “the instant agreement” as “the agreement dated August 17, 2018.”

In Part 7 of the 10th judgment of the first instance court, the defendant company " shall be deemed to be "the defendant company has a duty to settle the accounts in accordance with the business agreement of this case" and the 11th judgment shall be deemed to be "not to exclude the possibility that it will be partially responsible".

The following shall be added between the 8th instance judgment and the 6th instance judgment:

“5) The Defendants asserted that the agreement in this case was completely completed, that is, the Plaintiff’s side is responsible for and treated for the sale, and that it was conditional agreement attached to the conditions, such as accepting the change documents of the permitr, resolving the surrounding civil petition, etc., and the Plaintiff’s side, even though it did not have the intent and ability to fulfill these conditions, did not induce the Defendants to enter into such conditional agreement.

However, the evidence presented by the Defendants alone is insufficient to recognize that the agreement in this case was conditional agreement as alleged above by the Defendants, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, the above assertion by the Defendants is without merit.

A person shall be appointed.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and all appeals by the defendants are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.