1. The plaintiff's appeal and the conjunctive claim added by this court are all dismissed.

2. After an appeal is filed.

1. Basic facts and

2. The reasoning for the judgment of this court regarding the plaintiff's primary claim is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the following "the amended part"

[Modification] Each “Plaintiff” of the two pages 18, 20, and 3 of the first instance judgment shall be amended to “F” respectively.

The main point of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) the main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (b) the judgment of the court of first instance on the primary claim of the Plaintiff.

The judgment of the court of first instance added “A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion” between 13 pages 4 and 12.

If the judgment of the court of first instance is 4 pages 19, the “3..... judgment” is revised to “B. judgment.”

The first instance judgment’s 4 pages 20 shall be amended to “(A)”, “(2)”, “(3)”, and “(3)”, respectively.

3. Judgment on the plaintiff's conjunctive claim

A. The registration of ownership transfer in the name of the deceased on November 4, 2005 with respect to the apartment of this case, which was completed on November 4, 2005, is the registration of the establishment of a security to secure the purchase price claim regarding the sales contract between F and the defendant D on January 2, 2002 with respect to each of the shares in the land and the above-mentioned land in Seodaemun-gu Seoul, Seodaemun-gu G and H on each of the above apartment of this case. The F paid a total of KRW 180 million on the part of the deceased I from the date of the above sales contract to June 20, 205, and paid a total of KRW 5 million on August 20, 2005, and thus, the deceased has a debt under the security agreement to reduce the registration of ownership transfer on the apartment of this case to F.

However, since the network I transferred the apartment of this case to N around November 14, 2005, the Defendants, the heir of the network I, have a duty to settle accounts in cash with the F, the person who has established the security for transfer, as to the above apartment.

F On October 21, 2019, on the part of the Plaintiff, F claims against the Defendants of F for the aforementioned settlement amount.