1. On September 1, 2017, the testator is the right to lease the 69.38 square meters of the 1st floor of the G-based Seoul Northern-gu G ground building in the name of the net F.

1. Basic facts

A. The deceased F (H birth, death on November 15, 2017, hereinafter “the deceased”) had Plaintiff B, E, D, and Defendant under the chain of marriage with Plaintiff A.

B. On September 28, 2016, the Deceased leased from I the first floor of the G ground buildings in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, and paid KRW 155,00,000 to I the lease deposit.

C. In the inherited property division case with the Plaintiffs (Seoul Family Court 2017 Mahap1453), the Defendant asserted that the deceased bequeathed the above right of lease to the Defendant, and presented as evidence the “written notice of change of name and written approval” prepared on September 1, 2017 as a document stating the deceased’s will.

The contents of the documents presented by the Defendant are as follows:

(hereinafter referred to as "the document in this case"). I GF EF E FF L (B) / [the ground for recognition] without dispute, Gap's 2, 3, 10, 11 (which include the number number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul's statement in subparagraph 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The plaintiffs asserts that the summary of the plaintiffs' claims is invalid as the deceased's will on the grounds that the documents of this case are not in accordance with the method prescribed by the Civil Act, and that the deceased was the office capacity as of September 1, 2017, and that the will of this case cannot be ruled out to be forged by the defendant.

B. Determination 1) A will does not take effect unless it is in accordance with the method prescribed by the Civil Act (Article 1060 of the Civil Act), and the method of a will is five types of certificates of self-determination, recording, notarial and secret documents and instrument of instrument of instrument of instrument of instrument (Article 1065 of the Civil Act). As such, the Civil Act’s strict provision of the method of will is aimed at clarifying the will of the testator and preventing legal disputes and confusion arising therefrom. Thus, a will contrary to the statutory requirements and methods is null and void even if it conforms to the testator’s genuine intent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da5150, Oct. 25, 2007). Among them, a will made by an instrument of instrument of instrument of instrument of instrument of instrument of instrument of instrument