The instant lawsuit is dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet was owned by the Plaintiff A, the Plaintiff C’s 8/100 shares, the Plaintiff C, the E, E, F, H, K, M, N, andO’s shares, each of 5/100 shares, the Plaintiff G, the J, the Plaintiff G, the 4/100 shares, the Plaintiff I’s 9/100 shares, the Plaintiff L’s 15/100 shares, and the 8/100 shares, respectively.

B. The deceased died on May 20, 2017, and Q, R, S, T, U, and V, the first-class inheritance, filed a petition for adjudication on the renunciation of inheritance against the deceased’s inherited property. The Seoul Family Court rendered a judgment on January 26, 2018 citing the foregoing (2017 Go-man 6881).

(c)

The lineal ascendant and descendant of the deceased died all.

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit

A. The gist of the plaintiff's assertion died without the heir due to the renunciation of inheritance by the heir, and the share owned by the deceased pursuant to Article 267 of the Civil Act belongs to the plaintiff, who is another co-owner, in proportion to the share owned by the deceased. Therefore, the defendant is obligated to confirm the plaintiffs' ownership.

B. Determination Domins and lineal ascendants and descendants of the deceased have died;

Even if a blood relative of the deceased, who is the third-class inheritance, can exist, the plaintiff must prove that all the above inheritors do not exist, and the materials submitted by the plaintiff alone are insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, seeking confirmation of ownership of the deceased's share against the defendant who is not the heir of the deceased who can exist additionally, there is no benefit of confirmation. Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is an incidental law.

3. As such, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.