2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

Plaintiff, Appointors C, and D are the successors of deceased deceased deceased E (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) on or around October 11, 201, and the Defendant is the birth of the deceased.

On November 16, 1967, the reason for the registration of real estate registration is the Daejeon-dong, Daejeon-gu, which caused the completion of the registration, the transfer registration of real estate was made on November 17, 1967 on June 20, 1967 between the sale and purchase of the G G-dong, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu on June 17, 1967, with the 296/736 square meters among the 183 square meters in Seoul-dong, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, on March 11, 1964, on the 296/736 square meters, on April 5, 1963 and the 163 square meters in each of the 165 square meters in each of the 163 square meters in each of the 163 square meters on July 16, 1963. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25174, Jul. 16, 1973>

(hereinafter referred to as “F land”). Each real estate of this case was used as the site of the check plant where the Deceased had operated in the trade name “M” until 1982.

The Deceased transferred the factory to the Cheongju Industrial Complex around 1982.

On February 4, 2013, the Defendant sold each of the instant real estate and the Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon Daejeon KRW 1,89,777,920 in accordance with the procedure for land acquisition by consultation with the Korea Land and Housing Corporation. Around that time, the Defendant received bonds from the Korea Land and Housing Corporation in accordance with the attached Table 1 and the attached Table 363,77,920 won.

【In the absence of dispute, the Plaintiff’s assertion that there was no ground for recognition, the entry in Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the inquiry and determination of the fact about the Korea Land and Housing Corporation, and the overall purport of the pleading, and the Plaintiff’s assertion about the cause of claim as a whole, borrowed part of the purchase funds from the Defendant’s wife in the process of purchasing the real estate of this case in order to prepare M site around 1963, and in order to secure the borrowed money,