수익증권 권리존재확인 등 청구의 소
1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. Defendant B is the Plaintiff’s mother, Defendant C is the Plaintiff’s birth, Defendant D’s wife.
B. Defendant B, along with the husband’s net E (hereinafter “the network”), took over the restaurant from around 1984 in Seoul Jongno-gu in around 1992 as “F” (after change to “G”; hereinafter “instant restaurant”), and Defendant B’s operation of the instant restaurant, leading to a large number of people who have been developed by Defendant B, thereby gathering considerable property.
On the other hand, the plaintiff has been working in the restaurant of this case since 1992.
C. On December 23, 2006, the Deceased concluded an investment trust agreement (Account Number: H; hereinafter the above account is referred to as “the instant financial product”) to purchase KRW 300,000,00 of the beneficiary certificates of the Korean Vietnam-mix 2 Fund 59,381 (hereinafter “the instant beneficiary certificates”) operated by the Defendant NNH Investment Securities Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) in the name of the Plaintiff.
The Deceased died on October 18, 201.
E. On January 8, 2013, Defendant B, along with Defendant C, visited the branch of the Defendant Company’s luminous language with a passbook, hump and a securities card, and sold all of the instant beneficiary certificates in the name of the Plaintiff. On January 21, 2013, Defendant D withdrawn KRW 145,589,751 as sales price deposited in the instant account in the name of the Plaintiff at the point of the foregoing luminous language.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, Gap evidence No. 7-1, 2, and Gap evidence No. 8, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The deceased purchased the beneficiary certificates of this case in the name of the plaintiff in order to donate the property to the plaintiff, and even though the plaintiff has the right under the investment trust agreement on the account of this case, the defendant company was the defendant B, C, and D.