1. The plaintiff's lawsuits against the defendant C, D, and E are all dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On July 13, 2012, G orchard 2645 square meters (hereinafter “instant real estate”) owned by Defendant B, the ownership transfer registration was completed on July 13, 2012, where the share of 1645/2645 is the Defendant C’s name, and the remainder of 100/2645 shares was the same day donation under Defendant D’s name.

B. After November 10, 2017, the shares of Defendant D were transferred on the grounds of the same day in the name of Defendant E on the same day.

C. Defendant C and Defendant D are children of Defendant B, and Defendant E is the wife of Defendant C.

Defendant B prepared a real estate sales contract and a delegation contract, respectively, with the following contents as the Plaintiff:

(hereinafter “the instant sales contract”). The seller of real estate: The seller’s indication of the real estate B: F at the net City of 1000: the seller’s indication of the real estate B: the seller’s sale of the land at the above location, and the seller’s assignment of all property rights to the buyer (B) and the third party’s resale of the land at the average of KRW 10,000,000.

The terms of sale and purchase delegate (A): B real estate indication: The person who is delegated to F (1) at the net city: A’s length: A’s delegation; A’s delegation to the person to whom the said real estate is located (A) shall delegate all the rights of sale to the person to whom the said real estate is delegated.

A and B are responsible for all legal (civil and criminal) parts.

E. Defendant B: (a) KRW 10 million on April 4, 2006; (b) KRW 17.10 million on April 17, 2006; and (c) the same year as the purchase price of the instant real estate from the Plaintiff.

7.6.1 million won, and the same year;

8. A total of KRW 45 million was received on 14.14.1 million, and on 20.20 million on 20.5 million in the same year.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, and the fact that the seal affixed to the real estate sales contract No. 1 is based on the seal of Defendant B is presumed to be the authenticity of the entire document, since there is no dispute.

The defendants defense that the real estate sales contract was forged, but the evidence submitted by the defendants alone is recognized.