1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants, including the lawsuit acceptance by this court, is as follows.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as follows, except for the dismissal or addition of part of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Therefore, this is to be cited by the main sentence

8 pages 5 of the judgment of the first instance, "No. 11, 2013" and "No. 31, 2013" are deemed to be " October 30, 2013," respectively.

The following shall be added to eight pages 8 of the judgment of the first instance.

On the other hand, K died on October 16, 2016, when the trial was pending in the court, and Defendant BB, the spouse of the above network K, succeeded to the network K’s property.

Defendant B submitted reference materials to the effect that the report on the qualified acceptance was accepted by the Seoul Family Court after the date of closing argument in this court. The judgment of the Family Court on the acceptance of the qualified acceptance is merely recognized as satisfying the requirements of the qualified acceptance, but the final judgment on whether the approval of the qualified acceptance of inheritance is effective is decided in civil litigation according to the substantive law (see Supreme Court Order 2004S74, Feb. 13, 2006). Thus, whether the report on the qualified acceptance of the inheritance by Defendant BB was legally accepted should be dealt with in the lawsuit of objection later.

The following is added to 15 pages 15 of the judgment of the court of first instance. “Defendant D, E, G, and B” prescribed the terms related to the land transaction permission under Article 9 of the instant sales contract as a special agreement, thereby indirectly compelling P to fulfill the obligation of land transaction permission and allowing P to impose separate sanctions at the time of the violation. Therefore, the special agreement under Article 9 is an agreement on penalty separate from the scheduled damages. Accordingly, P is liable to compensate for damages, such as life-saving cost, lease profit loss, market decline, etc., suffered by the Defendants due to the invalidation of the instant sales contract due to the lack of land transaction permission.