1. The Defendant’s KRW 7,565,306 and its related KRW 5% per annum from July 24, 2019 to October 29, 2019 to the Plaintiff.

1. The basic facts C, who was a child, died on October 17, 2016 after having the Plaintiff, D, Defendant, E, and F as a successor.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1

2. The plaintiff's assertion that the defendant received a testamentary gift from the deceased C (hereinafter "the deceased") before the death of the deceased, and infringed the plaintiff's legal reserve of inheritance, which is the co-inheritors of the deceased, so the defendant shall return the violation amount to the plaintiff.

3. Determination

A. Under the Civil Act, when there are shortages in the legal reserve of inheritance due to the donation or testamentary gift of the inheritee, the person with the right to the legal reserve of inheritance can recover the shortage within the limits of the shortage, and when there are several persons who receive the donation or testamentary gift, they shall return the shortage in the legal reserve of inheritance to the proportion of the testamentary gift value they received (Article 1115 of the Civil Act), and under the Civil Act,

[Deficiency in the legal reserve = Amount of the legal reserve [property that forms the basis for calculating the legal reserve (property that forms the basis for calculating the legal reserve (property that forms the active property at the time of commencing the inheritance - the amount of the inheritance obligation) 】 Ratio of the person entitled to the legal reserve (1/2 of the inheritance in cases of lineal descendants and their spouses) - Special profit amount of the person entitled to the legal reserve (the amount increased by the amount of the person entitled to the legal reserve - the amount of the positive property gained by the inheritance - the amount of the inheritance obligation share]

B. (1) If the scope of the property based on the calculation of the legal reserve of inheritance (1) No. 2-1, No. 2-2, and the purport of the entire argument as a result of the market price appraisal commission, the deceased owned G Apartment H (hereinafter “instant apartment”) at the time of the death of the deceased, and on June 20, 2013, the third share of the instant apartment was registered as preservation of ownership on June 20, 2013. However, according to the evidence No. 4-3, and the purport of the entire argument, the deceased completed the registration of ownership of some shares in the name of the Defendant for the Defendant’s loan.