1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The grounds for admitting the judgment of the court of first instance, which the Defendants asserted as the grounds for appeal by this court, are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance. Accordingly, this court’s reasoning is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the partial dismissal or addition as follows, and thus, citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

[Supplementary or added parts] Under the fourth sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "Defendant W" in the third sentence shall be added to W.

No. 10 of the first instance judgment of the court of first instance shall be accepted in accordance with the first instance, "receive".

Part 11 of the first instance judgment "Article 4 (1) 2" in Part 10 shall be "Article 4 (1) 2", and under the main sentence of the Article 4 (1) 2, the "Cheongju" in Part 3 shall be written into " Changju", respectively.

Article 21(2) of the Inspection Act on the case of death without succession to the right to create a house even if P died on May 9, 2017, 2017, states that “The Defendants appointed Defendant B as the successor to the right to create a house even if according to each provision of the aforementioned Inspection Act,” following the first instance judgment No. 12, No. 4, following the second instance judgment, the Plaintiff cannot be the successor to the right to create a house at the first instance. However, the Plaintiff asserted that even if P did not succeed to the right to create a house even if P died on February 21, 2016, Article 21(2) of the Inspection Act is not applicable.

(k) Many of the circumstances as seen in paragraphs (m) through (m) are insufficient to recognize that P lawfully succeeded to the right to create a foundation before the death of P pursuant to the above Inspection Act, and there is no other evidence to recognize it. Therefore, the above assertion is not acceptable.

"in addition".

2. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and all appeals by the Defendants are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

The Defendants’ legal representative, on August 9, 2020, filed an application for resumption of pleadings with the Cheongju District Court 2018 High Court 2018 High Court 819, by asserting that it is necessary to submit the relevant documents as evidence.