1. The claim of this case is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On October 11, 2011, E (hereinafter “the Deceased”) died after having left the Plaintiffs and Defendant C, who were their children, as the inheritor, and Defendant D is the spouse of Defendant C.

B. On February 29, 2008, the Deceased sold a building F.180 square meters and its ground (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to G at the Government-si on February 29, 2008

[Ground for recognition] Unsatisfy

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. The gist of the assertion was that the deceased received 450 million won, excluding 200 million won, including deposit for the lease on a deposit basis, from among the purchase price of the real estate of this case 650 million won, from the account in the deceased’s name. Since the deceased died during his withdrawal and continued to be kept, the Defendants are liable for infringing the Plaintiffs’ share of inheritance (one-third share out of 450 million won) as to the above purchase price. Accordingly, the Defendants are liable for paying KRW 150 million to the Plaintiffs as a reference heir. Accordingly, they asserted that they seek payment of KRW 30 million among them.

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, Gap evidence Nos. 8-1, 2, 9, and 10-1, and the court's order to submit each financial transaction information of this case, the sales amount of the real estate of this case was deposited into the deceased's account, and the amount of KRW 394,80,680 among them was deposited into the defendant Eul's account, KRW 73,50,000 to the defendant Eul's account, but the above fact alone is insufficient to recognize that the defendants constitutes the defendant's successor to the name.

According to the above facts, the deceased transferred the above money to the Defendants in such a way that he received the purchase price of the real estate of this case and withdrawn it, and deposited it into the Defendants’ account (the plaintiffs' assertion that the deceased disposed of the real estate of this case due to the Defendants' demands are supported). In such a case, the deposit claim belongs to the Defendants, barring any other circumstances.