1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. Scope of adjudication of this court;

A. The following facts are clear on the records.

(1) On October 17, 2016, the Plaintiffs filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendants and the Joint Defendant E Co-Defendant E Co-Defendant of the first instance trial (hereinafter “E”, and, in the case of a stock company, the names of the corporations are not stated separately). On the date of the second hearing of the court of the first instance, the Plaintiffs stated an application for modification of the purport of, and the cause of, the claim on February 26, 2017, thereby modifying the purport of, the claim and the cause of the claim.

(2) On June 7, 2018, the first instance court rendered a judgment dismissing the remainder of the claim against the Defendants and the claim against E, by citing the part demanding confirmation of the absence of the obligation to return the down payment among the plaintiffs' claims against the Defendants.

(3) On June 22, 2018, the Defendants appealed against the part of the first instance judgment against the Defendants, but the Plaintiffs did not appeal.

B. According to the facts acknowledged earlier, the part concerning the plaintiffs' claims against the defendants in the judgment of the court of first instance as to the defendants in accordance with the defendants' appeal was judged by the court of first instance, while the part concerning the plaintiffs' claims against E in the judgment of first instance is confirmed by the court of first instance.

On the other hand, the part of the judgment of the court of first instance as to the plaintiffs' claim against the defendants against the plaintiffs is not included in the scope of the judgment of this court unless the plaintiffs are dissatisfied with.

In conclusion, the scope of the judgment of the court of first instance is limited to the part of the plaintiffs' claim against the defendants in the judgment of the court of first instance that ruled against the defendants, namely, seeking confirmation of the absence of the obligation

2. recognised facts;

A. The status of the parties (1) Plaintiff A was the owner of 3,051 square meters prior to F in Gongju-si.

On December 22, 2006, this land was divided into the land No. 1 of this case and the land No. 626 square meters prior to H in Gongju-si.

(2) As Plaintiff A’s children, Plaintiff B owned 522/83 shares out of the land No. 2 of this case.

(3) On March 29, 2006, the Defendants are the Defendants.