1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the Defendants shall be revoked, and all the plaintiffs' claims corresponding to the revoked part shall be revoked.

1. After remanding the case, the Plaintiffs had the Defendants at the trial before remanding the case. ① The Defendants, the implementer of the main apartment construction business, did not notify the Plaintiffs of the establishment of open space in the main apartment complex, size, location of the area, the subject and amount of the management expenses for the portion, etc., thereby deceiving the Plaintiffs. As such, the Plaintiffs, the Plaintiffs, upon deception or mistake, have cancelled the sales contract due to deception and mistake, sought the payment of unjust enrichment and damages for delay therefrom (the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment), ② even if the cancellation of the contract is not recognized, the Defendants violated the duty of disclosure or duty of explanation under the good faith as to whether the open space, which is an important circumstance that may affect the conclusion of the sales contract, and accordingly, sought compensation for damages for the tort and damages for delay therefrom.

(Claims for Damages) However, on June 5, 2013, the first instance court accepted only part of the claims that were premised on the Plaintiffs’ breach of duty of disclosure among the claims filed by the Plaintiffs on June 5, 2013, and dismissed the claims for restitution of unjust enrichment and the remainder

As to this, only the Defendants appealed against the part against the Defendants in the judgment before remanding the case, and the Supreme Court reversed the part against the Defendants in the judgment before remanding the case on October 6, 2014, and remanded this part to the court of the trial after remanding the case.

Therefore, in the judgment before remand, the part on the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment against which the plaintiffs' claim was dismissed and the part on the claim for damages is separated and confirmed. Accordingly, the judgment of the court of the first instance after remand is limited to the part on the claim for damages due to the violation of the duty of disclosure.

2. The court's explanation of this part of the facts is in accordance with Law No. 13, No. 16 and No. 17 among the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance.