1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. D A. On March 6, 1996, died, and at the time of death, D’s heir F, G, H, H, Plaintiff, Defendant B, and D’s heir I, the wife and son, and thereafter, upon the death of E on May 6, 2005, E succeeded to the deceased’s property.

The final statutory inheritance of the network D, E’s children, F, G, H, Plaintiff, and Defendant B’s network D’s children are 1/6 shares (=2/15 3/15 x 1/6).

B. As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) owned by the network D, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in Defendant B’s name on November 26, 2014, No. 68465, which was received on November 26, 2014, as the receipt of the Daegu District Court Decision 68465, March 6, 1996, on the ground of inheritance by consultation and division.

C. As to the real estate No. 3 of the instant case, the registration of ownership transfer was made in the name of the Defendant C on the ground of donation by the Daegu District Court No. 59044, Sept. 4, 2015.

On August 24, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a complaint against the Defendant B as fraud, fabrication of private documents, or uttering of a falsified investigation document, but the prosecutor in charge decided that the Defendant B prepared a written agreement on the division of inherited property on the ground that “It is reasonable to deem that the written agreement was prepared with respect to the preparation of an inherited property by all brothers and sisters, including the Plaintiff, while recognizing that the written agreement was obtained from all brothers and sisters (presumed consent).”

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 6 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. Although the Plaintiff did not hold a consultation on the division of inherited property with respect to each of the instant real estate, Defendant B infringed the Plaintiff’s inheritance right by completing the registration of ownership transfer in his own future, Defendant C, who is the wife of Defendant B, was well aware of such circumstances and thus, Defendant C was aware of it.