1. The plaintiffs' claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant Korea Housing Corporation (hereinafter “Defendant Corporation”) intended to pay KRW 351,209,780 to H who owned the said land upon a ruling by the Central Land Expropriation Committee on June 25, 2015, with respect to the land incorporated into the said public housing project, which is the land subject to the said project, the amount of KRW 539 square meters in Masan-si, Changwon-si, Changwon-si, Busan-si, which is the land subject to the said project. However, on August 13, 2015, the said compensation was deposited on August 13, 2015 due to the unknown whereabouts of H.

Changwon District Court Msan Branch, 2015, No. 1674.b.

H The deceased died on August 21, 1976 (hereinafter “the deceased”) and the wife I also died on June 12, 1993. As such, the deceased’s child (the deceased’s spouse and child in case of the deceased’s death) received the said deposit in proportion to his share of inheritance.

C. As the wife of the deceased, Defendant C received the above deposit as the deceased’s child.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Eul's evidence Nos. 1, Eul's evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Plaintiff’s request

A. The registration of transfer of ownership in the name of L on the K-ground housing is completed, and there is no K lot number and on the ground, the E-ground housing (hereinafter “instant housing”) which is presumed to have no house on the ground is registered as in the title of the above registration because the number of the E-ground housing (hereinafter “instant housing”) was mistakenly stated. The instant housing is a real estate purchased in around 1985 by the deceased’s land’s land owner, who is the deceased’s decedent.

Therefore, the compensation for the housing of this case should be paid to the plaintiffs, the heir of L, among the compensation following the adjudication by the Central Land Expropriation Committee.

B. Nevertheless, according to the above judgment, the Defendant Corporation deposited the deceased’s compensation for expropriation of the instant housing as the principal’s deposit, and Defendant C and D received the amount equivalent to their share of inheritance.

(c) therefore.