2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. The relationship between the parties 1) the network C (D, hereinafter referred to as “the network”).

2) On February 1, 2012, the deceased and the deceased were married on February 1, 2012. 2) On April 14, 2016, the deceased left a will in respect of the inherited property on April 14, 2016.

5.9. Death.

B. As a result of the death of the deceased upon division of inherited property, the Plaintiff, Defendant, E, and F succeeded to the deceased’s property, and all the inheritors including the Plaintiff (hereinafter “he co-inheritors”) agreed on October 9, 2016 on the division of inherited property to distribute the deceased’s inherited property to the co-inheritors.

(hereinafter referred to as “consultation on inherited Property of October 9, 2016”)

However, on May 9, 2018, the director of the tax office demanded the explanation of the user of the transfer price of Mancheon G, which is less than three parcels of land, such as Kimpo G, etc. owned by the deceased.

A) On November 27, 2006 and December 22, 2008, a total amount of KRW 7,675,000,000 was transferred, and based on Article 84 of the Inheritance Tax Act, the Plaintiff and other inheritors were ordered to submit the use of the transfer proceeds to all their heirs, including the Plaintiff, pursuant to Article 84 of the Inheritance Tax Act. The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, and the entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4

2. Plaintiff’s assertion and judgment

A. Although the inherited property that the Plaintiff came to go through a consultation on the division of inherited property as of October 9, 2016 exceeds the Plaintiff’s legal reserve of inheritance, it is apparent that the sale price of Kimpo real estate is presumed to have been donated to the Defendant, if the above amount is included in the property that serves as the basis for the calculation of legal reserve of inheritance, the Plaintiff’s shortage in legal reserve of inheritance may occur. Thus, the Defendant is claiming KRW 100 million

B. The key issue of the instant case pertains to whether the Defendant donated all or part of the proceeds from the sale of Kimpo real estate to the deceased.

However, it can be recognized according to the contents of evidence Nos. 3 and 8 and the purport of the whole pleadings.