1. The text of the judgment of the first instance, including the claims extended in the trial before remand, shall be modified as follows:

1. Progress of litigation;

A. The first instance court dismissed the Plaintiffs’ claim against Defendant H on the ground that it was impossible to determine how there exists any shortage in the legal reserve because the Plaintiffs did not prove the amount of the property that served as the basis for calculating the legal reserve of inheritance and the amount of the special benefit of the pertinent legal reserve of inheritance. The Plaintiffs appealed against Defendant H on the part against which they lost the legal reserve of inheritance.

B. The first instance court partially accepted the Plaintiffs’ appeal and ordered the Defendant to transfer the Plaintiff’s share of 7,902, 746/287, 988,600 of the instant real estate among the instant real estate in the first instance judgment, and partly accepted the Plaintiffs’ appeal by ordering the Defendant to implement the procedures for transfer of ownership based on the return of legal reserve of inheritance. Each of the remaining appeals of Plaintiffs B, C, E, and G, Plaintiff A, D, and F, each of the appeals of Plaintiffs A, D, and F, and all of the Plaintiffs’ claims for the return of legal reserve of inheritance extended in the first instance trial and the claim for the contract amount of Plaintiff A added in the first instance trial.

C. The court of final appeal made a mistake in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the special profits to be deducted when calculating the shortage of legal reserve by deducting the shares of Plaintiff D from the court prior to the remand in the calculation of the shortage of legal reserve, and ② such error affected the conclusion of the judgment, and ③ K transferred the ownership of L land bequeathed by the resolution of the settlement recommendation of the court of first instance to the Plaintiffs pursuant to the resolution of the court of first instance, with the consideration of the following: (a) although the interests of the Plaintiffs cannot be deemed as the special profits under Article 1008 of the Civil Act; (b) although the court prior to the remand in the case of the shortage of legal reserve, the court of final appeal did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the special profits to be deducted when calculating the shortage of legal reserve; and (c) there was an error of confusion between Plaintiff D’s shares among the inherited property, and the shares of