1. The defendant (Appointeds) and the appointed parties shall deliver to the plaintiffs the real estate stated in the separate sheet.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. With the center of the deceased A (hereinafter “the deceased”), the Plaintiff-Appellant B, the Plaintiff-Appellant B, the Nonparty-B, and the Defendant (Appointed Party; hereinafter “Defendant F”) is the father of G and Defendant F (the deceased’s deceased’s deceased’s deceased and Nonparty F’s deceased’s deceased and deceased’s deceased (the deceased’s deceased’s deceased’s deceased and Nonparty B’s deceased’s deceased).

B. On March 14, 2001, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of Defendant F was completed on February 14, 2001 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”).

C. On October 9, 2006, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the deceased was completed on September 29, 2006 on the apartment of this case. D.

On October 4, 2017, the deceased died while the lawsuit in this case was pending, and on October 4, 2017, the Plaintiff’s children, B, C, D, and E inherited the deceased’s property.

E. The Defendants currently reside in this area while occupying the apartment of this case.

[Judgment of the court below] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, the plaintiffs are presumed to be joint owners as the deceased's property heir, who is the title holder of the apartment of this case. Since the defendants occupy the apartment of this case, the defendants are obliged to deliver the apartment of this case to the plaintiffs, who are joint owners, unless there are special circumstances.

3. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. The Defendants: (a) purchased the instant apartment on February 14, 2001 and completed the ownership registration on March 14, 2001; and (b) purchased the instant apartment on March 14, 2001 and owned Defendant FF, and (c) demanded by G and Defendant F to create a security on the said apartment; and (d) demanded by G and Defendant F to obtain a loan; and (e) there was only a formal registration in the name of G, the deceased’s Rusine, under the agreement between G and Defendant F, to refuse it. Therefore, the registration of ownership in the deceased’s name is null and void by a false declaration of conspiracy. Accordingly, the Plaintiffs against the Defendants.