1. The defendant's KRW 15,181,818 per annum against each of the plaintiffs and 5% per annum from June 23, 2018 to February 11, 2020.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Nonparty E (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on June 23, 2018 while being hospitalized in the F Hospital, G Hospital, H convalescent Hospital, and I convalescent Hospital due to diseases, such as high blood pressure, lung cancer, cerebrovascular, etc., and died on June 23, 2018. The bereaved family is the Plaintiffs and Nonparty J and his/her spouse, who were their children, and the Defendant, who had been receiving a high-person hospital treatment.

B. At the time of the deceased person’s death, there was a balance of KRW 2,685,784 on the online general deposit account (Account Number K) of the deceased Saemaul Depository, and around October 2015, there was a claim for return of deposit under the lease agreement entered into with the non-party L for deposit amounting to KRW 40 million on the Seo-gu M housing located in Gwangju, Seo-gu.

C. Meanwhile, in the meantime, the deceased disposed of the house located in Seo-gu, Seo-gu, Gwangju, in the purchase price of KRW 228 million, which is its ownership, in the purchase price of the building purchased by the Defendant.

With respect to the deceased's inherited property, the plaintiffs received a total of KRW 75 million for each of 25 million, and the defendant has managed the high person's passbook and seal imprint, etc. while receiving the treatment for admission at a medical institution.

[Grounds for recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Recovery and scope of inherited property;

A. According to the above facts, the defendant unilaterally occupied the deceased's inherited property to be paid to the plaintiffs after the death of the deceased by taking advantage of the status of custody of the deceased's property, thereby infringing the plaintiffs' inheritance rights as co-inheritors.

As such, the plaintiffs who seek restitution are obligated to repay their inherited property equivalent to their respective shares.

B. As to this, the defendant alleged that the purchase price under the O-O building P purchased by the defendant was donated from the deceased, and that the deposit amount of the house located in Gwangju Seo-gu M is also the defendant's unique property, and thus, the defendant did not infringe the plaintiffs' inherited property. Thus, the above decision is made.