1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff, F, and G share 1/5 shares of each of the Plaintiffs, F, and G in a mountain for the purpose of gathering common sculptures among the Plaintiffs, F, and G. However, the Plaintiffs, F, and G agreed to sell the instant forest in order to raise expenses for the relocation of the tombstone and the development of land. The Plaintiffs, F, and G delegated the sale of the instant forest to F. The Plaintiffs, and G delegated the sale of the instant forest to F.

B. On October 13, 2015, F sold the instant forest land at KRW 140 million (the purchase price was initially determined by KRW 85 million, but later increased by KRW 140 million, which is the officially announced land price, to the Defendant, one’s own kys (F’s hh’s son), (hereinafter “instant trade”). The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer of the instant forest land on November 23, 2015.

(A) At the time of filing an application for ownership transfer registration of the forest of this case, the Plaintiff C directly prepared an application for registration with the certified judicial scrivener office to verify his status. (C)

On the other hand, the Defendant paid F the instant purchase price in KRW 8.5 million on May 14, 2015, the down payment of KRW 8.5 million on December 15, 2015, and KRW 131.5 million on December 15, 2015, respectively, and F spent the instant purchase price paid from the Defendant to the Plaintiffs and F, G’s transfer income payment, the transfer of ancestor seedlings, and the change of the form and quality of land.

(However, there is a lack of sufficient evidence to know the exact expenditure amount except capital gains tax). 【The ground for recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 5, 7, 8, 9 and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. ① The Plaintiffs merely delegated F with the authority to conclude the instant forest sales contract, which causes KRW 85 million, and did not delegate the authority to conclude the instant sales contract. Since F entered into the instant sales contract by forging the part under the names of the Plaintiffs in the instant sales contract, the instant sales contract is null and void, and even if F entered into the instant sales contract, the instant sales contract is invalid.