1. The Defendant’s share on November 24, 2014 with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. Inheritance Relationship 1) Nonparty D (hereinafter “the deceased”).

On March 26, 2005, the deceased died. Nonparty E, the deceased, Nonparty G, Nonparty H, Nonparty I, J, Nonparty K, and Nonparty L are the co-inheritors of the deceased. Specific inheritance relationship and inheritance shares are as shown in the attached Table 2) Meanwhile, as the deceased died on April 17, 1986 with the deceased’s wife M and the Plaintiffs as their children, the deceased M and the Plaintiffs were deceased on January 8, 2014.

B. On June 2, 2004, while N andO participated as a witness, the Deceased prepared a testamentary document stating that “A notary public shall testamentary gift to the Defendant one-third of the shares of the Deceased (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from among the real estate listed in the attached Form List as a witness of the Law Firm Sejong-gu, 2004.”

C. After that, on April 13, 2005, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the defendant based on testamentary gift as of March 26, 2005 by the receipt of the registration office of each Daegu District Court on April 13, 2005.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition of the duty to return the legal reserve, since the defendant did not meet the plaintiffs' legal reserve due to the deceased's testamentary gift of this case, the above real estate is subject to the return of the legal reserve. The above testamentary gift becomes effective within the extent of infringing the plaintiffs' legal reserve due to the plaintiffs' exercise of the right to return the legal reserve of this case. Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the legal reserve of this case to the plaintiffs, barring special circumstances.

B. Before the instant lawsuit was brought to determine the validity of the first conciliation decision as to the Defendant’s assertion, there was a decision in lieu of the conciliation decision as of December 22, 1997 and the conciliation decision as of October 17, 2001 between the Plaintiffs and the Defendant.