1. As to the portion of 2,627,451 out of the real estate listed in the separate sheet to Plaintiff B and C, the Defendant shall pay to Plaintiff B and C 2,627,451.

1. Facts of the dispute

A. E and F had 2 South and North Korean girls of Plaintiff A, G, H, I, Plaintiff B, Plaintiff C, and Defendant.

B. E died on January 10, 2010, while F was dead on February 18, 2012.

C. On April 26, 2012, Plaintiff A renounced inheritance to the deceasedF as the Daegu Family Court Decision 2012Ra1020, No. 2010.

F, on April 10, 2008, as a witness of J and K, set up a testamentary deed (No. 849 of 2008, No. 2008, a notary public) stating that “The Defendant is designated as an executor, and testamentary gift is given to the Defendant of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

E. At the time of F’s death, the transfer registration of ownership was completed in F in relation to the real estate Nos. 1 and 2 below.

On January 9, 2012, F, one of the co-inheritorss, donated 3/17 shares of the ownership of the real estate in the following table 1, and on January 12, 2012, F completed the registration of ownership transfer in G future on the ground of the above donation.

The share of N apartment 209 Dong 902 in Gangnam-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government, all of the instant real estate M is not the shares of N apartment 209 Dong 902 and not more than 3/17 shares of P 106 Dong 1001 and 1001.

Seoul Gangnam-gu Q apartment 301 Dong 908 (hereinafter referred to as "second real estate")

F. As to the instant real estate, on February 24, 2012, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on the ground of the said legacy in the future against the Defendant.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 3's evidence 12, 4, 5's evidence 1-3, Eul 1 and 2's evidence, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion is that the real estate of this case is the deceased F's inherited property, and the defendant acquired the ownership solely by reason of testamentary gift, thereby infringing the plaintiffs' legal reserve of inheritance.

Therefore, on February 18, 2012, the defendant's share of 1/14, each of the plaintiffs' respective legal reserve among the real estate in this case, to the plaintiffs.