1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasoning of the court of first instance’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the part of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in paragraph (2) is cited; and (b) Defendant H’s assertion in the trial of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the judgment as stated in paragraph (3) is added to the corresponding part; and (c) thus, it is acceptable in accordance

2. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the portion written by the application was “B” on the ground of “B” donation in Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance. Of the judgment of the first instance, the resolution was adopted on the ground of “B” donation in Part 2 of the judgment of the second instance.

“The resolution was made”

In particular, AA has been founded by the above clan General Meeting as a member of society. Of the 13th judgment, the part of the 11th judgment, “No person shall easily dispose of the property of a clan as his/her possession.” From the 14th judgment, the part of the 14th and 8th judgment is deleted to “not being submitted” in the 11th sentence from “the time of the registration of transfer of the above shares” to “not being submitted.” Of the 15th judgment, the part of the 18th and 19th sentence read “an application for the alteration of the purport and the cause of the claim of February 25, 2013” to “an application for the alteration of the purport and the cause of the claim of the 25th judgment of the first instance as of February 25, 2013.”

3. Determination as to Defendant H’s assertion in the trial room

A. The summary of Defendant H’s assertion (1) around 1997, Defendant H, a model of Defendant H, sold to Defendant H each of the instant lands in KRW 200 million each of the KRW 1/5 shares in the name of AC for financing due to the difficulties in business operation of BB. Defendant H, around April 1997, sold the land owned by Defendant H in the name of 200 million to Nonparty BD in order to raise KRW 200 million. Defendant H, around April 1997, sold the land owned by the former North Korea-Sink-gun to Nonparty BD in the form of KRW 200 million and had BD pay the price directly to AC.

(However, the transfer registration of ownership was completed to the non-party BE through the unregistered resale. Defendant H, through the above sale, has the above shares in the name of AC on January 23, 1998.