A. The Defendants, the networkF, and G were the children of H (hereinafter “the deceased”) who died on October 25, 2008, and upon the death of the networkF on September 1, 201, Plaintiff B and C, the husband of Plaintiff A and his children, succeeded to the networkF’s property.

B. As the deceased’s inherited property, there was a house of 238 square meters and its ground (hereinafter “the instant house and its site”), 1,336 square meters before J (hereinafter “the instant dry field”), and K 4,080 square meters (hereinafter “the instant field”) with the deceased’s inherited property.

C. On February 2014, the Plaintiffs, the Defendants, and G drafted a written agreement on the division of inherited property regarding the property inherited from the Deceased. According to this, the instant housing and land owned by G, the instant dry field owned by Defendant D, and the instant dry field owned by Defendant E, but the Plaintiffs did not receive inherited property of the Deceased.

2. Determination as to the claim against Defendant D

A. The Plaintiffs are asserting as follows.

1) On February 2014, the Defendants, the deceased’s inheritors, G, and networkF’s successors, consulted on the division of the property inherited from the deceased, and the instant housing and site owned by G. The instant field owned by Defendant D, and the instant field owned by Defendant E., but the instant field was determined as the value of the instant dry field as KRW 20 million and the amount calculated by deducting the expenses for various taxes, etc. from the purchase price received by selling the instant field, and then divided the Plaintiffs and the Defendants into 1/3 each, respectively. However, for convenience of registration, the agreement on the division of inherited property was written differently from the content of the said agreement. (ii) After the instant agreement, Defendant E sold the instant text for KRW 16,50,000,000, and sold KRW 1,56,110.