1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Basic Facts

As the network F (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on August 3, 1983, on the deceased’s wife G and G’s children, the Plaintiffs, the deceased, and the Defendant, and H jointly succeeded to the instant real estate owned by the deceased. On January 10, 1990, G jointly succeeded to six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six-six shares, and H, C, and D, respectively.

On February 15, 1990, the defendant completed the registration of the transfer of shares of the above co-owners due to the sale of shares on February 1, 1990 as to the shares of the plaintiffs, G and H, who are the remaining co-inheritors among the real estate of this case. Accordingly, the defendant became a sole owner of the real estate of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

The plaintiffs' assertion that the plaintiffs' assertion did not purchase the plaintiffs' share of the real estate of this case from the plaintiffs, but they forged the sales contract documents using the plaintiffs' seal and registration-related documents that the plaintiffs left to G and completed the registration of transfer of ownership of this case, so the registration of transfer of ownership of this case as to the plaintiffs

After the registration of inheritance on the instant real estate asserted by the Defendant was made, the Defendant did not facilitate the loan while the Defendant was aware of the loan, etc. to repay the inheritance debts of the inheritee. In other words, the Defendant agreed to solely inherit the instant real estate and to repay the inheritance debts by obtaining the loan. Since the registration of inheritance was made after the registration of inheritance, the ownership of the instant real estate was inevitably transferred in the form of “trade” due to the de facto difficulties in registering inheritance or correction due to the consultation division.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' lawsuit of this case against the defendant who is one of the co-inheritors who inherited independently by agreement division.