1. The part concerning the defendant in the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked.

2. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are all dismissed.

1. Basic facts

A. The relationship between the parties 1) Plaintiff A is a new construction of the Guro-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government F and G ground room (12 room) (hereinafter “instant construction”).

As to the first instance Codefendant D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”)

The contractor who entered into a contract with the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff B and C are the owner of the instant construction work, and they are in a relationship of relationship with the Plaintiff A. 2) The Defendant arranged the said contract between Plaintiff A and D.

B. On February 3, 2015, Plaintiff A and D concluded a contract for the instant construction project on March 9, 2015, and July 9, 2015, the scheduled date for commencement of the relevant construction project (hereinafter “instant contract”) shall be KRW 545 million in the contract for the construction cost of KRW 540 million on July 9, 2015 and the scheduled date for completion of the relevant construction project, but the Plaintiffs asserted that the amount of KRW 540 million is KRW 540 million, and the Defendant is not disputing this. (No value-added tax) and the rate of penalty for delay shall be set at 0.03%, and the contract for the instant construction project (hereinafter “instant contract”).

(2) Then, Plaintiff A and D asserted the scheduled date for commencement of the instant contract on May 8, 2015, the scheduled date for completion of the instant contract on September 8, 2015, the scheduled date for completion of the instant contract, and the construction cost of KRW 500 million as KRW 500,000,000, and the Defendant did not dispute this.

The change was made to the court.

C. Under the modified contract, on May 8, 2015, the approval D used to use the instant construction works commenced and newly built the instant construction works, and obtained approval for use on December 1, 2015.

【Evidence of Evidence】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap No. 2 and 3, and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Summary of the plaintiffs' assertion

A. Since the Plaintiff A had to manage the execution of the instant construction and the repair of defects, etc., the Plaintiff A and D shall jointly and severally compensate the Plaintiff A for the following damages (total of KRW 158.9 million).

However, among the balance of the construction cost of KRW 36 million paid to Plaintiff A, the amount calculated by deducting the cost of household appliances, etc. directly installed by Plaintiff A from KRW 50 million.

Since Eul did not pay the deduction, the defendant would eventually be jointly and severally with D to the plaintiff (i.e., KRW 158.9 million - KRW 36 million).