1. All appeals filed by the plaintiff (appointed party) and the claims selected by this court are dismissed.

2...

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for dismissal or addition of a part of the following, thereby citing this case as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Of the judgments of the first instance court,

1. The Defendant’s “Defendant” in the part of the basic facts is collectively referred to as “Defendant and C.”

The 5th, 7th, 7th, and 6th, the 5th, 5th, and 7th, of the judgment of the first instance are “Defendants and C”.

Defendant C at the last place of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be the “C”.

Part 10 of the Decision of the first instance shall add the following:

Although Defendant E and the husband of Defendant E issued a certificate of personal seal impression for the preparation of a waiver of the inheritance of the instant real estate after the death of the I, Defendant E and the husband of the instant case, Defendant E and their husband forged the document of gift by affixing a seal on the gift-related document, which is not the document of renunciation of inheritance, and thus, the registration of transfer of ownership of the instant gift under the Defendants’ name should be cancelled as the ground for invalidation of the registration of transfer of ownership.

On the other hand, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the documents related to the donation submitted at the time of the completion of the registration of ownership transfer of the cause of the donation of this case were forged. Therefore, this part of the assertion by the designated parties is without merit.

4. Judgment on the request for registration for revision of ownership

A. In the instant judgment on the division of the inherited property, the designated parties asserted that each of the instant real estate, which is the inherited property of the decedent I, was tried by the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, the Defendants, C, and the designated parties to divide the instant real estate into the share of statutory share of the inherited property. Therefore, the Defendants made a judgment on the division of the inherited property as to each of the shares stated in the 3th of the instant real estate