약정금
1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiffs and the Defendant died on April 20, 2012 while the Plaintiff and the Defendant owned the registration of ownership transfer with respect to a building with a size of 189.4 square meters and its ground (hereinafter “instant real estate”).
B. On July 1, 2014, the Plaintiffs, the Defendant, and their inheritors, including D’s subsidiaries, concluded an agreement on the division of inherited property with the effect that the instant real estate, which is inherited property, is owned by F’s sole ownership.
C. On May 7, 2014, F entered into a sales contract with G to sell the instant real estate in KRW 5 million, and on July 15, 2014, F completed the registration of ownership transfer with regard to the instant real estate to G.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, 3, Eul evidence 1 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiffs' assertion and decision-making plaintiffs asserted that they agreed to pay to the plaintiffs an amount equivalent to 2/13 of their shares of inheritance, namely, that of their share of inheritance, out of the purchase price (hereinafter "the agreement of this case") upon the conclusion of the contract of this case.
As shown in the Plaintiffs’ assertion that the instant agreement existed, there are evidence evidence No. 1 and witness H’s testimony.
However, while the plaintiffs asserted that the money they agreed to pay to the plaintiffs in this court is KRW 77 million, the witness H stated that the amount of the money they received from the plaintiffs and H is 40 million each, and there is a considerable difference in the amount. As seen earlier, upon holding an inheritance division consultation with the purport that the plaintiffs, the defendants, and H are to own the real estate of this case, the F acquired the ownership of the real estate of this case independently and sold the real estate of this case to G, it is difficult to view that the purchase price of the real estate of this case belongs to the defendant.