1. From the 1st of the month following the month to which the date of the final decision of this case belongs among the lawsuit of this case, real estate in the annexed list.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 19, 1974, D married with Nonparty E, and was divorced from the above E on April 22, 1996. From around 2003, D filed a marriage report on April 30, 201, and died on March 1, 2017.

B. D, from May 1, 2002, had been engaged in black salt retail business with the name of F Health Institute from May 1, 2002, and operated it with the Defendant after the Defendant’s marriage, and closed the business on August 22, 2016.

C. D around May 30, 2016, upon occurrence of cerebrovascular and cerebrovascular dementia, received hospitalized treatment at G Hospital and H Hospital until death, and partially possible communication, but had serious disabilities in short-term detention, long-term memory, place memory, and history of judgment.

On February 18, 2016, Defendant and D purchased real estate listed in the separate sheet at KRW 165,00,000 for price, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with 1/2 shares on March 18, 2016.

D on December 21, 2016, 1/2 of its own shares was paid to the Defendant on December 20, 2016 by completing the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of donation.

E. The real estate listed in the attached list is in possession of the Defendant, and the amount equivalent to the rent shall be KRW 1.5 million per month.

F. From December 27, 2016 to January 9, 2017, the Defendant withdrawn KRW 15,000,000 from the erogical Central Branch Account in the name of Nonghyup Bank. On March 14, 2017, the Defendant terminated the said account and withdrawn KRW 2,496,174.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 through 6, 10, Eul evidence 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs asserts that since at the time when the defendant withdraws money from the passbook as above, D had the intent to do so even if D had no capacity to do so, it constitutes unjust enrichment or tort, the defendant should return the amount equivalent to 2/7 of the plaintiffs' share of inheritance among the above withdrawn amount.

As seen above, the above facts are examined.