2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. The network E married with F and died on January 24, 2015.

The net G was married with the Defendant and formed I, J, and K under its chain, but died on June 1, 2008.

B. On October 25, 1993, on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant building”), the registration of ownership was completed in the name of the deceased E on October 25, 1993, and the registration of ownership transfer was completed on December 19, 208 under the name of the Defendant on December 17, 2008.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 6, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The Plaintiffs’ assertion is the ownership of the Deceased since the building was newly constructed by the deceased E with the money loaned in its name and the registration of preservation of ownership was made in its name.

However, unlike the grounds for registration entered in the register of the register of the instant building, the Defendant received the instant building from the deceased E at the time of 2008, and due to which the Plaintiffs infringed the legal reserve of inheritance.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for transfer of ownership to the plaintiffs' share 1/13 (=1/13 of each share of the plaintiffs' inheritance x 1/2) in relation to the building of this case.

B. The Defendant’s assertion that the building of this case, which is the Defendant’s husband, was newly constructed to L with the Defendant’s share of KRW 115,00,000 and the amount of KRW 115,000,000 and the amount of money deposited in the savings until now, as well as the amount of KRW 200,000,00 in total.

After the completion of the instant building, the deceased G trusted the registration of preservation of ownership in the name of the network E and F upon the request of the network E and the deceased G, and the Defendant received the instant building from the network E after the deceased, and the Defendant was fully liable for the taxes and public charges on the instant building.

Therefore, the building of this case is not the deceased E's inherited property, but the legal reserve of inheritance as alleged by the plaintiffs.