1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff and the Defendants are siblings with her mother as her mother and her mother as her mother.

E left the Plaintiff and four defendants as inheritor, and died on June 29, 2015.

B. E, before birth, donated its own property to the Plaintiff or the Defendants as follows.

1) On January 15, 2014, each real estate listed in the separate sheet was donated to the Defendants each 1/3 shares (the market value as of the date of the death of each of the above real estate is KRW 235,00,000,000.

(2) From July 30, 2013 to July 25, 2014, the Defendants donated total amount of KRW 436,348,233 to the Defendants.

3) On July 27, 2012, part of the amount of insurance purchased under the Plaintiff’s name G from around August 2, 2012, which was extended to the maturity of insurance, was donated to the Plaintiff by means of depositing in the G account again in the name of G around August 2, 2012. (c) There was no inherited property and liability at the time of the death of E. [Grounds for Recognition]. There was no dispute over the said inheritance, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and 15 through 18 (including each

each entry, the result of appraiser H’s market appraisal, the purport of the entire pleadings

2. Determination:

A. Calculation 1) Calculation 1/1 of the legal reserve of inheritance: (i) there was no positive inherited property and debt on the basis of calculation of legal reserve of inheritance; (ii) it is limited to the value of the donated property stated in paragraph (1) of the above 1.B. 235,00,000 won 436,348,2333 20,000,000 = 871,348,2333 won 2/1/4 of the Plaintiff’s legal reserve of inheritance x 1/2 of the Plaintiff’s legal reserve of inheritance x 1/83 x 1/83 x 871,348,233 won x 1/83 x 1/8 of the Plaintiff’s legal reserve of inheritance x 1/8 x 108,918,529 won 2). Thus, there

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim on the ground of infringement of legal reserve of inheritance is without merit.

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) asserts that the amount of KRW 200 million from E as above is not donated property, but its own property. 2) As seen above, it is recognized that the above KRW 200 million is part of the amount of the insurance contract refund under the Plaintiff’s father G’s title, but at the same time, the Plaintiff’s assertion is based on the evidence Nos. 15 to 18, and evidence No. 5-11.