1. A ship that connects each point of 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 14, and 5 of the [Attachment sheet] No. 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 15, 14, and 5, in order

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiffs and the defendant are children of the network H and network I, and they are co-inheritors of the above deceased.

B. The deceased deceased on April 25, 2007. The deceased died on June 10, 2010, and the deceased died on June 10, 2010. The Plaintiff A, B, C, and E filed a claim against the Plaintiff and the Defendant for the division of inherited property with the Suwon District Court 2010shap14, which did not reach an agreement on the division of inherited property between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant.

On October 9, 2012 from the appellate trial of the instant case (Seoul High Court 2012B68), conciliation was concluded between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant, and the content related to the instant case in the conciliation clause is as follows.

(hereinafter referred to as “instant conciliation clause”). Conciliation clause

3. The Defendant’s share of 1/2 and the Plaintiffs’ share of 1/10, respectively, shall be divided into 283 square meters prior to G in Sung-si, G, and 396 square meters prior to J.

Among each real estate above, the 1/2 share area close to 235 square meters in K is exclusively used by the defendant while divided ownership, and the 1/2 share area close to 350 square meters in L, M, and 714 square meters in M, respectively, shall be exclusively used by the plaintiffs, while the plaintiffs are divided ownership.

The area of possession shall be divided into the area of 283 square meters in G before G and the area of 396 square meters before J, in the following cases: Provided, That the area shall be divided according to the area of possession.

C. Pursuant to the above conciliation clause, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer as to shares of 1/10 and the Defendant’s shares of 1/2 of the Plaintiff, respectively, among the shares of 1/10 and the shares of 1/2 of the Suwon District Court’s Sung-si’s Sung-si’s registration office, No. 104096, Jul. 1, 2013 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant land before the instant merger”).

Of the land before the instant annexation, G land was classified as “the land category on the register,” but its land category was written on the land cadastre. However, pursuant to the aforementioned adjustment clause, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant stated that “after the instant annexation, the land before and after the instant annexation should be combined and divided according to the occupied area” in the said adjustment clause, the land category on May 22, 2015 as “the land category on the land cadastre of the said G land shall be changed.”