1. The plaintiffs' appeal and the plaintiff B's conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. The appeal costs.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, which cited the instant case, is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and this case is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, on the grounds that the court of first instance added and added to the conjunctive claim that Plaintiff B added in the trial as set forth in the following

(In view of the evidence duly admitted and examined by the court of first instance as evidence Nos. 10 to 26 and witness AA, Y, AB, AC, and AD respectively, the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are justifiable, and there are no errors as alleged in the grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs). 2. The part which is dismissed or added as of February 2, 199 and the following contents are added to the 56th of the court of first instance.

[2) Even if the F Training Institute’s claim for the transfer of the purchase price was not paid, a novation contract was concluded by the real estate sales contract dated February 3, 1995, and thus, the claim for the purchase price, regardless of the non-performance of new bonds established by the said contract, is extinguished.

[Attachment 1, 6, 8, and 9 of the first instance judgment - - - 7 of the fifth 7th - " - - 3 - . - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 13 of the first instance judgment - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - .

④ According to the evidence evidence Nos. 3 and 4, the defendant X’s representative on March 28, 2001 verified the plaintiffs’ claims, and the defendant liquidator X on May 1, 2007 confirmed the plaintiffs’ claims, and the defendant liquidator X on January 16, 2009.