1. All of the plaintiffs' primary claims are dismissed.

2. The defendant is among each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the plaintiffs.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The deceased F (Death on March 27, 2018) had the Plaintiffs and the Defendant between the husband’s deceased husband G and the Defendant.

B. The same month to the Defendant on September 6, 2016, as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet, which was owned by the Deceased (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”).

1. The transfer registration for ownership was made on the basis of the donation.

C. In the death of the deceased, there is no inherited property other than each real estate of this case, and there is no inheritance obligation.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 3, and 5 (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. Since the Plaintiffs entered into a donation contract with the Defendant on the ground that the deceased’s primary claim had no mental capacity due to dementia, the above donation contract is null and void. The Defendant asserts that the Defendant is liable to transfer ownership registration for shares of 1/5 of the Plaintiffs in each of the instant real estate, which correspond to the shares of the Plaintiffs, due to the recovery of real name, or that the Plaintiffs’ legal reserve of inheritance was infringed upon with the preliminary claim. Thus, the Defendant is liable to transfer ownership registration for shares of 1/10 of each of the instant real estate, which correspond to the legal reserve of inheritance

B. In relation to the main claim, it is not sufficient to acknowledge only the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 4, 6, and 9 (including additional numbers) as to the fact that the deceased had no mental capacity at the time of the above donation contract. Since there is no other evidence, the above assertion is without merit, and in relation to the conjunctive claim, in the absence of the above donation, each of the real estate in this case was inherited equally among the plaintiffs and the defendant with inherited property. However, inasmuch as the defendant, a co-inheritors, acquired all of the above real estate, and thus, the above donation infringed upon the plaintiffs' legal reserve of inheritance, the defendant is against the plaintiffs.