1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. The gist of the Plaintiffs’ assertion and the Defendant are co-inheritors of the deceased F, who died on May 30, 2015 (hereinafter “the deceased”). Since the deceased donated each real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Defendant, there was a shortage in the legal reserve of inheritance, the Plaintiffs and the Defendant seek the return thereof.

2. The plaintiffs' claim of this case was based on the premise that each real estate listed in the separate sheet constitutes donated property, which serves as the basis for calculating legal reserve of inheritance due to the death of the deceased.

However, each statement of Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 12 (including paper numbers) is insufficient to recognize that each real estate listed in the separate sheet is a property donated to the deceased by the defendant, and there is no other evidence to recognize it. Thus, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is without merit.

The specific reasons for each real estate are as follows:

The plaintiffs claim that the above real estate constitutes the property donated to the defendant by the deceased in 1984, since the deceased transferred the shares of the plaintiff B and C to the defendant around 1986. Thus, the plaintiffs claim that the entire part of the real estate constitutes the property donated to the defendant by the deceased.

According to Gap evidence No. 4-1, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on October 20, 1971 by 1/3 shares of the above real estate among the defendant, the plaintiff, the plaintiff Eul, and the plaintiff C on June 14, 1984, and the ownership transfer registration was completed on October 20, 1971. The shares of the plaintiff B and C on November 21, 1986 are transferred to the defendant's future.

However, the preceding owner of the above real estate is the fact that the plaintiffs and the defendant's attachment H (the above real estate became the registration of ownership preservation in the name of the deceased H on June 30, 1970 and the ownership of the defendant et al. was transferred in the future around 1984). The defendant revealed that the above real estate was a donation of a hh punishment by the above real estate attachment H, and the written statement prepared by the plaintiff A (Evidence No. 12-3) is also the same purport.