1. The Defendant returned the Plaintiff’s legal reserve of inheritance on January 3, 2017 with respect to one-eight share of the real estate listed in attached Table No. 1.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”) and the deceased D (the death of March 3, 2003) had the Defendant, E, Plaintiff, and F as their children under the chain.

B. On January 3, 2005, the deceased appears to have been the largest son B (Defendant) with the property in Geum-gu, the second E (Defendant), and the third G appears to have been the son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’s son’

C. On May 13, 2005, the Deceased completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of donation on May 12, 2005 to the Defendant on May 13, 2005.

On December 5, 2005, the deceased completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of donation on December 3, 2005, and the defendant completed the registration of transfer of ownership on April 7, 201 to L and M on April 6, 201.

E. The Deceased died on February 9, 2012, and there were Defendants, E, Plaintiff, and F, a child of co-inheritors.

F. From March 7, 1994, F had been diagnosed as a mental fission, and had been hospitalized and treated as a outpatient. At present, F was hospitalized in a N Hospital, and the Defendant reported F to the point of view.

【In the absence of any dispute, the entire purport of the arguments and arguments of Gap's 1 through 3, 5 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul's 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings [the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been established, since it is recognized that the name and signature of the deceased are based on each description of Eul's 1-1 (the testament confirmation is based on evidence Nos. 1-2 and 5-5).

The defendant has forged the above document.