1. All appeals filed by plaintiffs A, B, and C and the defendants against plaintiffs D are dismissed.

2. Of the appeal costs: (a)

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the addition of the following "2. Additional Judgment" as to the allegations added by the Defendants in this court, and thus, it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendants’ assertion that the attached appraisal by the judgment of the court of first instance was jointly inherited only the portion indicated in the indication (c). Accordingly, Plaintiff D did not have the right to request the cancellation of registration of preservation of ownership or transfer of ownership under the Defendants’ name as to each of the above parts, since there is no ownership as to the remaining parts (i), (ii), and (iv).

B. We examine the judgment, and Plaintiff D sought cancellation of registration of preservation of ownership or transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendants as an act of preserving jointly-owned property in the position of co-owner who jointly inherited the entire forest of this case (see, e.g., an application for change of claim and cause of claim as of July 20, 2017). Accordingly, the Defendants’ aforementioned assertion on different premise is without merit.

3. The plaintiff A, B, and C's primary and conjunctive claims must be dismissed in entirety, and the plaintiff D's claims should be accepted for reasonable grounds.

The judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable in its conclusion, and all appeals filed by the plaintiff A, B, and C and the defendants against the plaintiff D are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.