1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 11, 1987, the registration of ownership transfer was made in each H’s name with respect to the area of 3,652 square meters, 417 square meters prior to F, and 955 square meters prior to G, Haan-gun, Chungcheongnam-gun, Chungcheongnam-do.

B. After that, each land listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant land”) was classified, merged, and land category change. On November 6, 2008, the Changwon District Court’s receipt of registration office for the establishment of the instant land on November 3, 2008, as Defendant D’s receipt of the ownership transfer registration on November 3, 2008 (hereinafter “instant ownership transfer registration”). As to each land listed in paragraphs (5) and (6) of the separate sheet, each of the instant land was registered under the name of Defendant Saml Agricultural Cooperative (hereinafter “Defendant Cooperative”); on May 11, 2010, under Article 9422 of the receipt of the same registry office on May 11, 201, each of the following registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage (hereinafter “the establishment of the instant superficies”); and on February 12, 2014, each of the registration of the establishment of a superficies was registered under Article 3151 of the same registry office (hereinafter “the creation of superficies”).

C. H died on November 4, 2008, and jointly succeeded by the Plaintiff B and C, who is his wife, and Defendant D is the birth of H.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3 evidence, Eul 6 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the primary claim against Defendant D

(1) The Defendant D’s assertion (i.e., the Plaintiff’s assertion for registration based on forged documents is an abstract cancer and the spirit of the Plaintiff is mixed, and completed the instant registration of transfer of ownership by forging a sales contract and an application for registration. Therefore, the instant registration of transfer of ownership should be cancelled as an invalid registration.

The evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is insufficient to admit the above argument by the plaintiffs, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it, so the above argument by the plaintiffs is without merit.

Rather, there is no dispute or based on Gap evidence 6, Eul evidence 14, witness I, J, and K's testimony and the whole purport of arguments.