1. The Defendants: (a) each of the Plaintiffs Company A KRW 53,380,250; (b) KRW 53,380,250; and (c) KRW 53,380,250; and (c) each of the above amounts, on November 201.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiffs share 1/2 shares of D orchard 1,775 square meters, E orchard 2,003 square meters, and F forest land 328 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “the Plaintiff’s land” in combination with the said D and E”). Defendant C is the owner of the land owned by the Plaintiffs, including 340 square meters, GJ 340 square meters, H miscellaneous land 66 square meters, I orchard 3,018 square meters, J forest 304 square meters, J forest 304 square meters, K forest 707 square meters (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant C-owned land”).

B. On June 10, 201, Defendant C entered into a contract for the creation of a housing site with Defendant AADD company to carry out the housing site sale business, and Defendant AAD limited partnership company carried out the construction of a housing site for the land owned by Defendant C (hereinafter “instant construction”).

C. During the process of the instant construction project, Defendant AB Limited Partnership (hereinafter “Defendant AB”) committed development activities on the land owned by the Plaintiffs, and the land owned by the Plaintiffs was destroyed by the removal of earth and sand and the alteration of part of the land into a sudden slope.

Due to such damage, the exchange value of the land owned by the Plaintiffs (344,460,00 won prior to the damage) decreased to 21,930,00 won (322,530,000 won at the damaged condition). The cost of KRW 213,521,00 is required to restore the land owned by the Plaintiffs to its original state.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number), the result of the on-site inspection by this court, the result of each appraisal by appraiser L and M, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the defendants are liable for damages as joint tortfeasor.

As to this, Defendant C argues that Defendant A’s limited partnership company should be fully responsible for Defendant A’s land because Defendant A’s limited partnership company did not perform construction as designed and arbitrarily damaged the land owned by the Plaintiffs.