All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 3, the court below, citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, it is difficult to see that the statement that the principal and interest of the project in this case are collected prior to the construction cost is set up with a separate account to recover the principal and interest of the project in this case prior to the construction cost. ② According to the business and loan agreement of this case, the construction cost can be paid prior to the due date for the principal and interest of the project in this case unless the due date for the principal and interest of the project in this case arrives. However, as to the order of execution of the funds deposited in the fund management account, it is clearly stated that the principal and interest of the project in this case should be paid prior to the due date for the construction cost of the project in this case, it is difficult to readily conclude that the funds in this case should be paid prior to the due date for the principal and interest of the project in this case. ③ Since the construction cost remaining after the due date for the completion of the apartment house in this case is about KRW 5.6 billion, the remainder of the construction cost in this case to be collected.

Examining the record in light of the relevant legal principles, the lower court did not err by misapprehending the legal doctrine on the interpretation of the instant project proposal, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court