1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff (appointed party) corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below.

The court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for dismissal or addition of part of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary or additional parts] The second parallel 4 of the second parallel 4 "Bronon February 9, 2008" is deemed to be "Wronon February 9, 2008."

The second place following the second place of conduct is as follows: “The Defendant, after the death of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of 1,826 square meters and the F 3,965 square meters of the Dong-nam-gun E, Chungcheongnam-do, and the female of the 3,9

The second page 15 and 16 "the death date of the deceased, Feb. 7, 2009," shall be "the death date of the deceased C, Feb. 9, 2008," respectively.

The last two parallels " July 17, 2009" are deemed to be " February 9, 2008".

The third, third, and fourth parallels are as follows:

(4) Meanwhile, the Defendant, after the death of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of February 10, 2008, occupied and used the land independently from July 17, 2009, after the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the deceased of the land. Accordingly, the Defendant shall return to the Plaintiff, etc. the amount equivalent to the Plaintiff’s share out of the amount of profit from the possession and use of the land of this case, as unjust enrichment, the Defendant is obliged to pay each 793,

The evidence submitted at first 11 is the "Evidence Nos. 8, 9, 11-15, 1, 24-1, 1, 24-2, 1, 2, and 7," respectively.

The 5th page 11 to 18 shall be as follows:

In full view of the purport of the evidence No. 24-1 and No. 2, the Plaintiff et al. is the owner of 19/152 shares of the land of this case since the death of the network C.