1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 10, 1961, Plaintiff A married with I and had the rest of the Plaintiffs and J under the Sss as their children, and J married with H on March 28, 2008 and had the Defendant as Defendant.

B. On December 17, 2007, I completed the registration of ownership transfer (No. 172815, Dec. 17, 2007, which was received on December 13, 2007, for each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by oneself (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) due to the gift dated 13, 2007 (hereinafter “the instant gift”).

C. On July 18, 201, I died, and the Plaintiffs agreed with the Plaintiff C on the 1,579 square meters of the Hanyang-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-dong-si in each one-half share divided. On October 27, 201, I completed the registration of ownership transfer on each of the above real estate by inheritance by the above consultation division.

J died on November 14, 2016, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate on December 13, 2016 due to inheritance.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 10, Eul evidence 1 and 2 (including additional number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. As to the allegation that the registration of transfer of ownership in this case was null and void due to the plaintiffs' administrative ability, 1) since the deceased I showed dementia symptoms at the time of the donation in this case, due to frequent drinking, etc., and was in the state of business ability to make all the normal life without the plaintiff, the donation in this case made by the deceased I is null and void. Therefore, the defendant is obligated to cancel the registration of transfer of ownership in this case, which was completed without any legal cause (the defendant may have been able to make the allegation sufficiently even in the first instance court, but the defendant has to make the above assertion at the appellate court, so it should be dismissed as a means of attack.