1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. In accordance with the expansion of the purport of the claim in the trial, the defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. The land D, E, and F, and G (hereinafter “instant land”) are jointly owned by the Defendant, who is the subject of Plaintiff B, and the mother-child H, who is the Plaintiff B.

B. On May 25, 2012, based on the design drawings, the Plaintiffs requested the I architect office to provide design services related to the construction of each community living facility with a scale of five floors for the land of this case, and each community living facility with a scale of seven floors for the land of this case for the land of this case for the land of this case for the land of this case, and based on the design drawings of this case for the land of this case for the land of this case for the land of this case for the Defendant

9. 26. Prior deliberation was conducted by the Building Committee of Busan City for the construction of the land No. 2 of this case.

C. After that, the Defendant completed the registration of initial ownership in the land No. 1 of this case under the name of the Defendant and H joint title on August 2, 2013, after newly constructing the second floor neighborhood living facilities in the land No. 2 of this case, and completed the registration of initial ownership in the land No. 2 of this case under the sole name of the Defendant for the land No. 2 of this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, Gap evidence 6-1, 2, Gap evidence 7-1 through 3, Gap evidence 9-18, Eul evidence 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiffs 1) The Defendant requested the Plaintiffs to design the construction of the building on the land Nos. 1 and 2 of this case. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs requested design, etc. to the architectural office, and the Plaintiff Company paid KRW 25,00,00 to the Plaintiff Company, and the Plaintiff Company paid KRW 14,30,000 to each Defendant at its expense. Thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiffs. 2) Even if the Defendant did not request the Plaintiffs to design, etc., even if the Defendant did not request the above design, etc., the Defendant obtained profits without any legal cause at the expense of the Plaintiffs’ design, and thus, it was unjust to the Plaintiffs.