All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

A. Article 5(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Securing, etc. of School Sites (amended by Act No. 13006, Jan. 20, 2015; hereinafter “former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Special Cases of School Sites”) provides that “The Mayor/Do Governor may develop and sell the land to construct a detached house in the development project area or impose and collect charges on the persons who sell the land in lots or sell the apartment house.”

The above provision is only a basis provision for imposing and collecting school site charges on persons, etc. who sell multi-family housing by the head of a local government, and it does not prevent a person who sells multi-family housing from including an amount equivalent to the school site charges in selling

B. The lower court, based on its reasoning, determined that Article 5(1) of the former Act on Special Cases concerning School Sites cannot be deemed as being violated, even if the sales price of apartment buildings sold by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs included an amount equivalent to the charges for school sites.

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal, there were no errors by misapprehending the legal principles on Article 5(1) of the former Act

2. As to the ground of appeal No. 2, the lower court, on the grounds as indicated in its reasoning, determined that Article 38-2 of the former Housing Act (amended by Act No. 10219, Mar. 31, 2010) does not apply to apartment buildings sold by the Defendant to the Plaintiffs.

The judgment below

In light of the records, the above determination by the court below is just, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the upper limit price ceiling system as otherwise alleged in the grounds of

3. As to the remaining grounds of appeal, the lower court, on the grounds indicated in its reasoning, between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant.