1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 19, 2015, Plaintiff A entered into a sales contract with the Defendants for the purchase of each of KRW 125,684,200, and KRW 711, and KRW 125,472,20, and KRW 12,547,220, respectively, of the E-building Nos. 705, 708, and 709, respectively. On the same day, Plaintiff A paid the Defendants the down payment of KRW 705, 708, and KRW 709 and the down payment of KRW 12,568,420, and KRW 709.

B. On March 19, 2015, Plaintiff B entered into a sales contract with the Defendants for the purchase of each of the instant real property in KRW 125,684,200 (including each of the sales contracts listed in the above paragraph (a)) and KRW 125,688,420 on the same day (hereinafter “each of the instant sales contracts”) with the Defendants on March 19, 2015, and paid 12,568,420 won as the down payment to the Defendants on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. As to the allegation of cancellation by fraud, the plaintiffs deceiving the plaintiffs that F will leave benefits through resale at the time of each contract for sale in this case, and they concluded each contract in this case, so the contract in this case is revoked as a delivery of a copy of each of the complaint in this case, and accordingly, the defendants should return the money paid by the plaintiffs as unjust enrichment.

However, the testimony of the witness G is insufficient to recognize the above facts, and there is no evidence to prove that F had concluded each sales contract of this case by deceiving the plaintiffs.

B. The Plaintiffs agreed to sell all of the instant real estate prior to the due date for the payment of the remainder under each of the instant sales contracts, but failed to implement the agreement. As such, the Plaintiffs cancelled each of the instant sales contracts on the grounds of the Defendants’ nonperformance, and the Defendants are reinstated to the Plaintiffs.