기타(금전)
1. The plaintiff's main claim is dismissed.
2. The Defendant’s KRW 88,937,799 and its amount from December 2, 2016.
1. The facts below the underlying facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 5, and Eul evidence No. 4 (including branch numbers, if any, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) by reference to the whole purport of the pleadings.
The deceased C (hereinafter “the decedent”) died on August 8, 2013, and his/her heir is the Plaintiff, Defendant, Nonparty E, F, and G, who is the wife of the decedent.
B. On May 22, 2012, the inheritee prepared and executed a testamentary deed (hereinafter “notarial deed of this case”) with the content that the Defendant will testamentary gift to the Defendant of each real estate listed in the separate sheet that was owned by the inheritee (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) as a notary public No. 573, 2012, and each real estate listed in the separate sheet that was owned by the inheritee.
After that, the decedent died on August 8, 2013, the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant, which was based on the above legacy on each real estate in August 16, 2013.
2. Judgment as to the main claim
A. Although Nonparty I signed as a witness in the notarial deed of this case, he did not act as a witness in the process of preparing the notarial deed of this case, Nonparty J, another witness, without the participation of the witness, is a will made without the participation of the witness, and the notary public does not have any fact that he reads the contents of the will to the witness.
Thus, the will by an authentic will of this case is null and void because there is a defect in the requirements of ① the participation of two witnesses among the requirements for preparation of an authentic will as stipulated in Article 1068 of the Civil Code, ② the notary public takes the demand of the testator and read it to the testator and the witness. Thus, the registration of ownership transfer based on the testamentary gift which the defendant completed with respect to each of the real property of this case is also null and void.
Therefore, the defendant is the plaintiff.