1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant C and D shall be dismissed respectively.

2. Ansan District Court's Ansan Branch 2016 Madan105.

Basic Facts

A. The deceased E (the deceased on September 25, 2016, hereinafter “the deceased”) had his/her children F, G (the deceased on March 29, 2016), and Defendant B (the deceased on March 29, 2016), but F was declared missing.

Defendant C is the spouse of the network G, the Plaintiff and Defendant D are the children of the network G.

B. On June 11, 2016, a will book in the deceased’s name (hereinafter “the will book of this case”) as indicated in the attached Form was drawn up.

The testamentary book of this case contains the full text of the will, the address, name and resident registration number of the deceased, and the date of preparation under the title of the “Will”, and the signature of the deceased is affixed to the right side of the name, and the seal of the deceased is affixed.

C. The full text of the will of the instant will state that “H apartment (H apartment, 309 Dong-dong 204) the Plaintiff lives is the Plaintiff.”

On January 17, 2017, the head of the instant will was present at the Suwon District Court (2016 Ma10105) and sealed the Plaintiff and the Defendants. Defendant C and D stated that they had no objection to the contents or execution of their will, and Defendant B stated that they had objection to the content or authenticity of their will.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including additional numbers), the purport of the entire pleadings, and the lawsuit for confirmation of claims against defendant C and D must have the benefit of confirmation as a requirement for protection of rights. The benefit of confirmation is acknowledged where there is dispute between the parties as to the legal relationship subject to confirmation and where the confirmation is rendered when there is apprehensions about the plaintiff's rights or legal status, and thereby, the defendant C and D are the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate such apprehensions (see Supreme Court Decision 2014Da218511, Dec. 11, 2014). Since there is no dispute over the validity of will by the deceased's will by the will of this case, the plaintiff's defendant C and D.