1. Of the instant lawsuit, the suit against Defendant E and F shall be dismissed.

2. All of the plaintiffs' claims against Defendant D.

1. 사실관계 [인정근거] 다툼 없는 사실, 갑 1∽3, 9호증, 을 1, 2호증(각 가지번호 포함)의 각 기재, 변론 전체의 취지 G(이하 망인)는 배우자 원고 A과 사이에(1982. 4. 15. 혼인신고) 자녀로 원고 C, B을 두었는데, 2016. 7. 23. 사망하였다.

① As to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “the apartment of this case”), the ownership transfer registration in the name of Defendant D was completed on December 5, 1997, May 27, 2003, and the ownership transfer registration in the name of the deceased was completed on August 26, 2015, and the ownership transfer registration in the name of Defendant D (hereinafter “the ownership transfer registration in this case”) was completed on August 28, 2015 due to the sale as of August 26, 2015.

② On December 1, 2017, the director of the Mine District Tax Office notified the Plaintiffs of the determination and notification of inheritance tax on the prior donated property and inherited property confirmed to be omitted from the report. It deemed that KRW 320 million out of the transfer price of apartment of this case constitutes inherited property.

③ In the appeal procedure regarding the above disposition, the Plaintiffs asserted to the effect that “the instant apartment cannot be considered as the Plaintiffs’ inherited property with the property trusted by Defendant D’s title trust to the Deceased.”

① On August 9, 2007, the Deceased prepared and executed the attached Form 2 share transfer contract to Defendant D, and also prepared and issued the attached Form 3 confirmation document.

② As to each share acquisition agreement in the name of the deceased H 2,100 shares, each share acquisition agreement between the deceased and the defendant E and F was prepared on July 21, 2016.

2. Summary of the Plaintiffs’ assertion on the legality of the lawsuit against Defendant E and F: At the time of July 21, 2016, the Deceased had no mental capacity, and there was no fact that the Defendants had met. Therefore, the Plaintiffs seek nullification of each share acquisition agreement as of July 21, 2016.

However, ex officio a suit for confirmation of relevant legal principles is allowed in cases where there is a benefit to immediately settle the current rights or legal relations between the parties to the dispute, unless there are other special circumstances.