1. All appeals by the defendant against the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. The plaintiff.

1. The summary of the case is the case where the plaintiffs filed a claim for the payment of the remainder of the construction cost equivalent to the reduction price and the damages for delay, alleging that the price was reduced unfairly by adjusting the contract amount with respect to the existing construction cost already paid by the defendant for the reason of price fluctuation, although the plaintiffs completed and delivered the apartment construction work contracted by the defendant against the defendant.

The judgment of the court of first instance accepted the plaintiffs' claim on the ground that the defendant's payment of the cost of the work to the plaintiffs to the plaintiffs to the final and conclusive level not to be subject to the adjustment of reduction, and the defendant appealed against this.

2. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: ① among the judgment of the court of first instance, the following portions are corrected; ② Five pages [Grounds for Recognition] were commenced on July 3, 2012 (Seoul Central District Court 2012 Ma116) and D was appointed as the administrator of the rehabilitation obligor's wall construction and taken over the proceedings of this case on the construction of the plaintiff's wall mountain. ③ The part of "B-B-B-6" in the last six pages is changed to "A evidence 12-3, B-B-6, Eul evidence 19, and Eul's evidence 19; ④ The part of the application for the payment of price fluctuation, design change, or change of the terms and conditions of the construction contract, which is to be prepared by the general contractor was changed to "A-B-B-6" and the part of the final judgment of the court of first instance, which is to be added to "A-I-D-B-I-D-I-D-I-D-I-D-D-I-D-I-I-I-D-D-I-D-I-I-D-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-D-I-I-I-D.".

C. Foods

(a) Four pages below.