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

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

1. The reasons why this Court is stated in this part of the underlying facts are the same as that of “1. Basic Facts” in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, if it excludes the following parts, and thus, they are included in the summary pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

A. “Defendant E and J, K, Plaintiff A, B, C, and D” in Defendant E and the Plaintiffs, J, K, and the first instance court Co-Plaintiff A and C.

The Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs No. 4, 13, "the same Ri" has been added to "Gangwon Man-gun Wi".

2. Grounds for the plaintiffs' claims

A. The network H purchased each of the instant lands from O or Defendant F, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under the sales contract under the name of Defendant E, the south of which was the head of the registration of ownership transfer.

This constitutes a three-party title trust agreement, and thus, the above title trust agreement is null and void pursuant to Article 4(1) of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder’s Name. Under the above title trust agreement, the registration of ownership transfer in Defendant E, which completed each of the instant lands, is also null and void.

B. Therefore, Defendant E is obligated to cancel the registration of transfer of ownership based on the sale and purchase contract as of August 24, 1972 with respect to the instant G land, and Defendant F is obligated to complete the registration of transfer of ownership with respect to the Plaintiffs’ inheritance shares among the said land on the ground of the above sale and purchase contract with the deceased H’s heir.

C. On the other hand, Defendant E sold the instant P and S land in the U.S. and received the purchase price.

Since the registration of transfer of ownership in each of the above land is null and void, the above defendant shall have obtained unjust enrichment equivalent to the above purchase price without any legal ground.

Therefore, the above defendant is obligated to return the money equivalent to the inheritance shares of the plaintiff among the above one billion won to the plaintiffs as unjust enrichment.

3. Determination

A. The ground for the claim by the Plaintiffs on the premise of determination is the network H, Defendant E, and each of the instant lands.