1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Basic Facts

Plaintiffs, Defendant C, D, and E are children of the network H (hereinafter referred to as “the network”), and Defendant F is Defendant D’s children.

On December 29, 2017, the Deceased donated the instant land to the Defendants (hereinafter “instant land”). Of the instant land, Defendant C, and D, Defendant E, and F, respectively, share of 1/12, and the ownership transfer registration based on the instant donation was completed on January 3, 2018, as the receipt of 247, with respect to each of 5/12 shares as to the instant donation.

The Deceased died on November 10, 2018.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and the purport of the entire argument of the plaintiffs as to the purport of the argument by the purport of the whole argument by the plaintiffs, the deceased did not have the mental ability to determine the meaning or result of the donation due to an unidentified dementia. The contract of this case was made in the state of mental and office capacity, and the contract of this case is null and void, and the registration of transfer of ownership as to the land of this case was completed by the defendants in the future. Thus, the defendants are obliged to implement the procedure for cancellation registration of transfer

Judgment

Relevant legal capacity means mental ability or intelligence that can be reasonably determined on the basis of the meaning or outcome of his act based on normal perception and towing power, and the existence of his capacity should be determined individually in relation to specific legal acts.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Da58367 Decided January 15, 2009, Supreme Court Decision 2001Da10113 Decided October 11, 2002, etc.). According to the results of the specific judgment Gap 4, 5, and 12, each fact inquiry about the I Hospital and I/C care hospital of this case, the deceased was judged to have a detailed dementia prior to the conclusion of the gift contract of this case, but it is recognized that the deceased was determined to have a detailed dementia, and the above evidence and each of the evidence Gap 6 through 11 are merely the donation of this case.