1. The Defendant’s share in the Plaintiff A’s respective real estate listed in the separate sheet is 87,784,611/309,961,176, and Plaintiff B and Plaintiff C’s share.

1. Basic facts

A. Inheritance Relations and Status E of the Parties married to Non-Party deceased F and placed Defendant, Plaintiff A, Plaintiff B, G, Plaintiff C, and H as their children.

E The deceased on November 2, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”) and the deceased’s heir are children, Defendant, Plaintiffs, G, and H, and they have inheritance shares one-six each.

G around December 9, 2015, G and H transferred all rights related to inheritance and legal reserve of inheritance to the deceased to the Plaintiff, and notified the fact and reached the Defendant around that time.

B. On October 1, 2015, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer for real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 49168, which was entered in the separate sheet No. 49168, Sept. 30, 2015, based on donations. On September 7, 2011, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer for real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 4080, Sept. 5, 201, based on donations of the Gwangju District Court’s Netcheon Branch Support Receipt No. 4080, Sept. 5, 2011.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The plaintiffs asserted that the plaintiffs did not have any knowledge that they donated each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter "each real estate of this case") from the deceased to the defendant, and even if the deceased donated the gift, the registration of ownership transfer has been completed due to the defendant's false statement, and thus, the above registration is null and void. The defendant asserts that since the defendant did not have the right to withdraw the deceased's deposit, it should return it for each inheritance share.

B. The evidence submitted by the plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize the plaintiffs' assertion that the defendant had concealed the deceased and concluded a gift contract, and that the plaintiffs had withdrawn the deceased's deposit without authority, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit without further review.

3. Preliminary claim.