1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Details of the disposition;

A. F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “F”) newly built a 354.73 square meters of a reinforced concrete structure’s 4th floor (multi-household housing), 211.19 square meters of a second floor, 3 floors 211.19 square meters of a third floor, 211.19 square meters of a fourth floor, and 4 floors 21.19 square meters of a fourth floor (hereinafter “instant housing”) on the land outside the Donan-gun-gun, Yannam-do, and obtained approval for use on April 20, 2012.

B. Since then, around 2012, F divided the two-fourths of the instant housing into two units by floor, and sold it to H, Plaintiff B, Plaintiff A, I, J, and K. Accordingly, the registration was completed by sharing the said six shares in the copy of the register of the instant housing either 105.59 or 105.6/63.57.

On the other hand, the building ledger for the second to fourth parts of the instant housing is written on the building ledger without specifying the number of houses, unlike the above certified copy of the register, and the plaintiffs and six persons for the second to fourth parts of the instant housing are written on the share of 105.59 or 105.6/633.57 shares.

C. Since then, the above H, B, Plaintiff A, I, and J completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the instant housing by specific number of housing units on the grounds of the termination of mutual title trust, following the conciliation procedure on January 30, 2013 (Yanju District Court Decision 2012S.613).

Accordingly, the owner of the register of the instant house is as follows.

Plaintiff E ( April 29, 2016) No. 1 No. 201 as of the first buyer of the number of houses, No. 302 No. 301 No. 302 No. 1 No. 1 201 as of the owner (the date of change) No. 1 H Plaintiff C (the date of April 6, 2016) No. 4302 No. 5 No. 401 as Plaintiff D (the date of April 28, 2016) No. 6402 as of September 18, 2017

D. On October 27, 2017, in order to resolve the inconsistency between the building ledger and the certified copy of the register, the Plaintiffs filed an application with the Defendant for the division of the aggregate building ledger that changed the entries of the existing building ledger to the same extent as those in the above certified copy of the register. Accordingly, the Defendant’s multi-family house corresponding to the single house on November 23, 2017 is the partitioned ownership of each household.