All appeals by the plaintiffs against the defendants are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

purport, purport, and.

1. The grounds for appeal by the plaintiffs citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and even if the evidence submitted in the court of first instance and the statements in Gap evidence 24 to 27 additionally submitted by the court of first instance, the fact-finding and the judgment of the court of first instance are justified.

According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 24 through 27, which were additionally submitted by the plaintiff at the trial, Eul filed an application for provisional seizure against the defendant Eul with the loan of January 30, 2016 as the preserved bond under the Suwon District Court known-Support 2019Kadan746 regarding the real estate in its possession, and Eul presented the correction to the above court "No refund of dividends 35,479,645 won dividends paid to defendant D from dividends 3, 4, 5, and the above facts were found to be consistent with the plaintiffs' assertion that the act of issuing a promissory note Nos. 2 and 2 notarial deed was false declaration, but each of the above documents appear to have consented to the claims of Eul as a unilateral document and failed to submit objective materials to support the above claims of Eul, and it appears that Eul did not own the above ES's claim for provisional seizure and the above ES's claim for the return of dividends to Eul was not presented.