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.

1. The reasoning of this court’s judgment citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, given that the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of some contents as follows.

2. The dismissal of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: 3. 5. 5. 6.

On December 25, 1913, the real estate of this case was assessed as L on December 25, 1913. The Plaintiff A is an infant of L, and the Plaintiff B is the son of K. The J died on April 11, 1994, and the Defendants are the successors of J. . 5 through 7 as follows.

“B. The Plaintiffs asserted that, while their residents abroad and abroad reside, the J has forged or fraudulently prepared the letter of guarantee or confirmation on each of the instant real estates with N at the time they used them, and completed the registration of initial ownership. The Plaintiffs asserted that the registration of initial ownership was completed by preparing a false letter of guarantee or confirmation on each of the instant real estates with N at the time of their residents abroad and abroad. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiffs (Evidence A8, 10, 12) and witness M of the first instance trial are insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff’s testimony led the other party to the conversation, as it is difficult to believe the content as it is, or that the content alone is insufficient to recognize that the registration of initial ownership was completed by forging a letter of guarantee or confirmation, and there is no other evidence to prove that the presumption ability of initial ownership preservation conducted by the

3. The judgment of the court of first instance is legitimate, and all appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.