1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the case, is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, if the court excludes the part to be filled by the following Paragraph 2, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. Parts to be dried;

A. Each “instant agreement” in the first instance judgment Nos. 4, 15, 6, and 14 is each “each of the instant agreements”, “Defendant 4,” “D”, and “Defendant 4,” “Defendant 21,” respectively.

B. On the 5th page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the following facts are stated: “The fact that the defendant has arrived at the defendant, and the content of the plaintiff A’s expression of intent included in the above declaration of intent shall be deemed to have been aware of new facts related to the compensation for expropriation during a separate investigation process. It is recognized that the defendant did not accurately notify the plaintiffs who are joint investors of the matters related to the compensation for expropriation, and that he was aware of the fact that the defendant was aware of the fact that he had demanded the written agreement properly by deceiving and deceiving the female women who are well aware of social circumstances.”

C. On February 14, 2014, part 5 of the first instance judgment, the part 7 of the first instance judgment, “In accordance with the above facts of recognition, Plaintiff A may cancel each of the instant agreements on the grounds of fraud or mistake. However, according to the above facts of recognition, Plaintiff A, at least before February 14, 2014, was issued a non-prosecution decision following the investigation process.”

Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be deleted from 18.

E. From No. 5 to No. 6 of the judgment of the first instance, “Plaintiff B prior to each of the instant agreements” was dismissed as “B prior to each of the instant agreements in light of the developments leading up to the completion of the mandate, the relationship between Plaintiff B and D, etc.”

F. On the 7th page of the judgment of the court of first instance, the “data” in the 14th page is considered as “Evidence”, and the 7th page 15, and