All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A. According to the reasoning of the first instance judgment cited by the lower court, the lower court determined that each of the instant lands did not have an objective condition expected in light of the transaction norms, on the grounds that construction activities could not be performed without blasting the said rocks, by taking into account a large-scale rocks on each of the instant lands purchased for the purpose of construction, and by taking any more cost than normally anticipated base destruction cost on each of the instant lands purchased by the Plaintiffs and intervenors.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to defects in the subject matter of sale and liability for nonperformance due to incomplete performance, etc.

B. According to the reasoning of the first instance judgment cited by the lower court, the lower court determined that the Defendant was negligent in not knowing the fact that the lower court did not distribute rocks on each of the instant land underground, on the ground that the responsibility to verify the nature, such as soil condition, etc. of land was basically the Defendant

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to negligence in default liability.

C. According to the reasoning of the first instance judgment, as cited by the lower court, the lower court determined that it is difficult to conclude a special agreement on the exemption from liability relating to base agreements between the Plaintiff L, M, N,O, and Plaintiff F’s succeeding intervenors Co., Ltd. and the Defendant, and that it cannot be deemed that the foregoing Plaintiffs and the Intervenor processed any defect and the expansion of damages arising from base agreements on the ground of each of the instant land.

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the above judgment of the court below is just.