1. All appeals filed by the Plaintiff and the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasons for the conclusion of this case by the court of first instance are as follows, except for the addition of the following '2. Additional Judgment' as to the assertion that the plaintiff and the defendants stressed in the trial of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. The plaintiff's assertion and its determination 1) The plaintiff's spouse's assertion are not the deceased D's heir, but the plaintiff's spouse's 250,254,945 won, which is the money collected by S, out of the purchase price for L and building in Gangseo-gu Seoul Metropolitan L land and building, is merely the money obtained by defraudation against S's network D's acquisition, and cannot be recognized as the plaintiff's special profit. Article 1008 of the Civil Code provides that "where there is a person among co-inheritors who received a gift or testamentary gift from an ancestor, and the gift or testamentary gift does not reach his/her share of inheritance, if the gift or testamentary gift does not belong to his/her own share of inheritance, the gift or testamentary gift shall be considered only in cases where the heir's lineal descendant, spouse, or lineal ascendant is given a testamentary gift or testamentary gift, the heir's special gift or testamentary gift is not different from the gift or testamentary gift of the deceased's heir.

(See Supreme Court Order 2006S3, 4 dated August 28, 2007). Each entry in the evidence Nos. 14 and No. 16, which is acknowledged as being comprehensively based on the overall purport of the pleadings, is subject to the following circumstances, namely, S grants property only to the network F, which is a large child of the network D.