1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The Seoul Central District Court against the defendants.

. The Agreement (hereinafter “Agreement”) states that “the agreement is null and void as an agreement violating Article 103 of the Civil Act,” rather than an estimate of damages, the Plaintiffs of the default penalty agreement, which was submitted after the closing of argument in the trial at the court of first instance.” However, it is reasonable to deem that the agreement constitutes an actual attack method. Therefore, the Plaintiffs’ assertion that the agreement in this case is liquidated damages is without merit. * The agreement in this case was concluded by the Defendants to urge the Plaintiffs to implement compulsory execution procedures and express their intent to voluntarily perform obligations, and the Defendants are likely to incur damages due to delay in compulsory execution procedures, and thus, the agreement in this case is necessary to compel the Plaintiffs to perform its obligations 0,000,000 won as well as 0,000 won as 0,000 won, 50,000 won, 00 won, 50,000 won, 5,000,000 won, 5,000,000 won, 2,00.

(b) however,