1. The defendant's decision to recommend reconciliation in Seoul Eastern District Court 2012Gahap1267 against the plaintiffs is based on the decision to recommend reconciliation.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) On February 11, 2004, the Plaintiff A and D concluded a sales contract between the Plaintiff A and the Defendant, and the Plaintiff A and D are each real estate listed in the separate sheet from E (hereinafter “F real estate”).

(2) After the purchase of a total of eight parcels of land and one building, F Real Estate was completed under the name of the Plaintiff A, and the remaining real estate was completed under the name of the Plaintiff D, and on April 15, 2009, the Defendant sold the above eight parcels of land and one building to the Defendant in total of KRW 2.2 billion.2 billion thereafter, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer for F Real Estate on February 9, 2010.

B. On December 20, 2007, F real estate was the cancellation and recovery of the registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage of this case (hereinafter “the registration of the establishment of the neighboring mortgage of this case”) and the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the neighboring real estate G consisting of the debtor A and the mortgagee G on December 20, 2007.

On May 13, 2008, the cancellation was made on the ground of the termination on May 13, 2008.2) However, it was revealed that Plaintiff B, the husband of Plaintiff A, deleted the registration of the establishment of the establishment of the instant root by forging and exercising the power of delegation in the name of G. In such an act, Plaintiff B was sentenced to one year of suspension of execution on July 20, 201 due to criminal facts, such as fabrication of private documents and uttering of a falsified investigation document, etc. On July 20, 201, Plaintiff B was sentenced to one year of suspension of execution on July 20, 201, and all of Plaintiff B’s appeals and appeals were dismissed.

3) On July 18, 2012, G filed a lawsuit seeking the restoration registration of the establishment registration of the instant neighboring mortgage that was cancelled with the Plaintiff A and the Defendant as the other party, and rendered a judgment on July 18, 2012 that “the Plaintiff shall implement the procedures for the restoration registration of the establishment registration of the instant neighboring mortgage, and the Defendant shall express his/her consent to the said restoration registration,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive on October 21, 2013, pursuant to the foregoing judgment, on November 19, 2013, the restoration registration of the establishment registration of the instant neighboring mortgage was completed.

C. On June 3, 201, 1 Plaintiffs, including the Plaintiffs’ damage compensation agreement and the establishment registration of the Defendant’s neighboring mortgage registration, etc.