유류분반환
1. Defendant C, Defendant C, Defendant D, each of 8,793,354 won, Defendant E, Defendant E, and Defendant F, each of whom was 8,936,510 won, and Defendant F.
1. Basic facts
A. Status 1) G (H students, hereinafter “the deceased”). G
(1) On January 9, 2018, Defendant C, Nonparty I, and the Plaintiffs, the deceased’s heir, were married on May 25, 1979 with Defendant C, but the agreement was reached on August 23, 201. Defendant E and F are children of Defendant C and Defendant D.
B. On January 22, 1985, the Deceased’s act of donation before the birth was completed on January 24, 1985 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet from Defendant D (hereinafter “instant land”). The Deceased donated each real estate listed in paragraph (1) to the Defendants before the birth (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”). As indicated below, on January 24, 1985, the Deceased acquired the registration of transfer of ownership on January 24, 1985.
On October 6, 2010, 1995, the donee of the real estate donated by the No. 1/6 on the date of donation, who was non-existent on December 23, 1995, donated to Defendant C on October 6, 2010, 1/6 of the instant land, which was donated to Defendant C on October 6, 201, and Defendant C, on February 4, 2003, 3/12 of the instant land, 3/12 of Defendant E’s 3/12 of the instant land, among the instant land, on November 22, 2007, donated to Defendant C on September 26, 2014, 3/12 of the shares in 6/12 of the instant building among Defendant C’s shares in 3/12 of the instant land among the instant land.
C. At the time of the deceased’s death, active inherited property and inheritance liability did not exist at the time of the deceased’s death.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 2, Eul's evidence No. 1, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination as to the cause of action
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion against the Defendants of the deceased was that the Plaintiffs’ legal reserve of inheritance was infringed due to each of the instant prote donations.
Therefore, the defendants are primarily obligated to return to the plaintiffs in proportion to their gift property acquired by each party as much as the plaintiffs' shortage of legal reserve of inheritance.