1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Defendant B, among the Plaintiff, 475,013,119 won and 351,817.

1. This Court’s reasoning concerning this part of the basic facts is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of the first instance, except in the following cases. Thus, this Court’s reasoning is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

Part 3, "additional charges" shall be raised to "additional charges (hereinafter referred to as "additional charges")".

Part 4, Paragraph 13 of Article 13 provides that "Each amount shall be paid in addition to KRW 140,097,876, and such amount shall be based on the premise that the inheritance tax was appropriated for the portion to be borne by the Defendants."

Part 4: The following shall be added to Part 19:

In relation to the deceased's inherited property, "The inheritance tax and additional dues actually imposed on the plaintiff, F, H, G, and the above co-inheritors, and the inheritance tax and its appropriated details paid by them are as shown in the attached Table 1 of Inheritance Tax." Article 6, Section 3 of "No. 6, this shall result in a difference between the attached Table 1 and the amount."

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The reasoning of this court concerning this part of the claim for reimbursement and claim for damages is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since this part of the claim is stated in the fifth and sixth parts of the judgment of the court of first instance, it is identical to the entry in the fifth to eighth and sixth parts of the judgment of the court of first instance.

B) Preliminary assertion (the Plaintiff’s preliminary claim for damages is that the Plaintiff calculated the Plaintiff’s indemnity amount based on the details of the Plaintiff’s actual payment of the purchase price of the I real estate by the heir’s inheritance tax, etc., the Defendants were obligated to apply the I real estate sales price to inheritance tax according to the heir’s respective inheritance shares, and if the said obligation had been performed, the portion of the Plaintiff, F, G, and H’s inheritance tax burden was extinguished. However, the Defendants breached this, thereby making the above sales price appropriated for their inheritance tax, thereby extinguishing the portion of the Plaintiff, F, G, and H’s inheritance