1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3. Article 1 of the judgment of the court of first instance

1. Basic facts

A. The deceased E (hereinafter “the deceased”) had four children between the deceased F (the husband’s death on September 4, 2015) and the deceased, the husband, who was four children. The Plaintiffs, the Defendant, and the deceased.

The deceased G died on November 19, 2001, before the deceased’s death. The spouse and lineal descendants are wife Q, children R, S, T, and U.

B. At the time of the deceased’s death on September 4, 2015, the instant real estate exists as property owned by the deceased, and there is no other active property or small property.

(no dispute exists between the parties which has not been disclosed specially).

On May 30, 2013, the deceased, on May 30, 2013, prepared a testamentary gift of the instant real estate to the Defendant.

(hereinafter “instant legacy”). Accordingly, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 7, 2015, which was after the deceased’s death, based on legacy.

In addition, on October 21, 2015, the establishment registration of a mortgage consisting of the debtor, the mortgagee, the H&D association, the maximum debt amount of KRW 480,000,000,000, and on October 29, 2015, the establishment registration of a mortgage consisting of KRW 1 billion,000,000,000,000,000.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 1 to 5, 14 to 19, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. The plaintiffs' assertion that the real estate of this case was bequeathed from the deceased and completed the registration of transfer of ownership.

On the other hand, the plaintiffs have no property donated from the deceased or otherwise inherited.

Thus, the defendant is obligated to return the plaintiffs' respective legal reserve (1/8 shares) infringement among the real estate of this case in kind.

On December 28, 2009, the plaintiffs and the defendant prepared a letter of intent on the part of the plaintiffs to distribute the property held by the deceased to 25% and 50% of the defendant except for taxes on the property held by the deceased. The claim for the return of the forced portion of this case does not affect the contents of the letter.

However, the claim for the refund of the legal reserve of this case is set forth above.