1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff (appointed) and the appointed party corresponding to the amount ordered to be paid below shall be lost.

1. The verification network C died in a traffic accident on December 29, 2014, and his heir has the Plaintiff, the designated person, and the Defendant, who are his children.

At the time of death, the Deceased owned 203 multi-household 40,000 (hereinafter “instant house”), deposit claims, 75,926,668 won.

On January 12, 2015, the Plaintiff, the Appointor, and the Defendant drafted a written agreement on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant agreement on division of inherited property”) with the content that the instant house shall be owned solely by the Defendant, and the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 16, 2015, and thereafter, the instant house is incorporated into the family urban planning and completed the registration of ownership transfer on February 7, 2017.

On March 18, 2015, the Plaintiff received 62,640,000 won from Dong Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. for the death of the Deceased and remitted the remainder of 59,348,000 won after deducting litigation costs, etc. to the Defendant.

On July 13, 2015, the Defendant paid KRW 41,000,000, out of the inherited property to the designated parties, and to the Plaintiff on July 14, 2015, respectively.

On September 16, 2015, the Plaintiff received KRW 7,000,000 from the driver of a sea-going vehicle in the foregoing traffic accident, and remitted it to the Defendant on the same day.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2, 3, Gap evidence 2-1 through 7, Gap evidence 4-1, 2, Gap evidence 5-2, Gap evidence 10-1, 2, 3-1, 3-2, and 3-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Of inherited property, the Plaintiff’s claim for the division of inherited property of this case as to the compensation portion of the instant housing among inherited property was made for the purpose of facilitating the payment of compensation for the instant housing that was planned to be expropriated at that time. As such, the compensation for the instant housing still constitutes the Plaintiff, the designated person, and the Defendant’s joint inherited property

Therefore, it is true.