1.The judgment of the first instance court, including any extension, reduction, and addition claims, shall be modified by this Court as follows:

1. The reasoning for this part of this Court’s reasoning is the same as that of the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, and thus, this part is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. As the Deceased’s claim against the Defendants (except for the ancillary claim against Defendant H) died on July 1, 2012, the Plaintiffs, who were the deceased’s children, and Defendant F, who were the children of Defendant D, E, H, and the deceased, inherited or inherited the deceased’s property by inheritance or substitute. Since the deceased’s forced inheritance was infringed upon by donation of real estate and cash to Defendant D, M, H, network M, and Defendant H’s wife Defendant I before his birth, the Defendants are obliged to pay to the Plaintiffs the same amount as the primary claim as the secured inheritance amount.

B. In a case where the donated property, which serves as the basis for calculating the legal reserve of inheritance, is not deemed as a donation to a third party, and the land transferred to Defendant I is deemed as a donation to Defendant H, a co-inheritors, Defendant H is obligated to pay to the Plaintiffs the same amount as that of the preliminary claim for a refund short of the legal reserve of inheritance.

3. The reasons for this part of this Court’s judgment are as stated in Articles 2 through 8 of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the following additional judgments as to the plaintiffs and the defendants’ assertion, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

【Additional Judgment】

A. The plaintiffs' assertion 1) that the land of Chungcheongnam-gun, P, and Q received as a donation from O, P, and Q should be excluded from the basic property for calculating the legal reserve of inheritance. The plaintiffs' assertion that the facts acknowledged in the civil case that had been established in the civil trial are valuable evidence, barring any special circumstances, and thus, it cannot be rejected without any reasonable reasons. The lawsuit claiming for the cancellation of ownership transfer, etc. filed by the defendant Eul against Q, etc. (Seoul Central District Court).