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

A. (1) On December 15, 1993, the network E completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the real estate listed in Section 1 of the [Attachment List] on December 15, 1993. (2) The network E completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the real estate listed in Section 2 of the [Attachment List] on August 9, 206.

3) On May 28, 1985, the network E completed the registration of initial ownership relating to the real estate listed in Paragraph 3 of the Attached List No. 3. 4) The network E died on February 6, 2015, and there were F, the Plaintiffs, the children, the Defendant, G and H as the wife’s legal heir.

B. On August 5, 2015, the Defendant: (a) as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet on August 5, 2015, the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of “the inheritance by consultation and division on February 6, 2015” (hereinafter “instant registration”).

(A) complete the proceedings. [Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (if available, including each number), the inquiry results on the Daegu District Court's Young-gu branch office, the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. On August 2015, the Defendant, the main point of the Plaintiffs’ assertion, issued a seal imprint certificate and a certificate of personal seal impression to the Plaintiffs, G, and H about each real estate indicated in the separate sheet.

However, since the defendant completed the registration of this case by forging a written agreement on division of inherited property with the content that each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet is inherited by himself/herself, the registration of this case is invalid without any cause.

Therefore, the plaintiffs seek the cancellation of the registration of this case as an act of preserving common property.

3. As long as a registration of ownership transfer has been made on the register of real estate subject to judgment, it would be presumed that the procedure and cause for the response would be justified, and the party asserting the unfair cause of the procedure and cause is liable to prove it (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2002Da46256, Feb. 28, 2003). The following circumstances, namely, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant’s mother, indicated in subparagraph 1, are between the deceased E’s legal successors.