2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

A. The Plaintiff, as between October 12, 2016 and October 19, 2016, remitted money of KRW 10 million to the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) (hereinafter “the instant remittance”) and September 19, 2016, and between September 1, 201 and December 11, 2016, remitted money to the Deceased or received money from the Deceased on 12 occasions in total as follows.

The Plaintiff’s remittance amount on September 1, 2016, 101,000 on September 1, 201, 201, 901,00 on September 2, 2016; 3.2,030,00 on September 13, 2016 on September 13, 2016; 1,001,00,000 on September 1, 2016; 1,001,000 on September 1, 20, 200 on June 6, 2016; 1,00,000,007; 1,000 on September 701, 200,00 on September 28, 2016; 10,000 on September 1, 2016; 1,000 on September 1, 2016;

B. After January 1, 2017, B died. On January 10, 2017, the Plaintiff asserted that the instant remittance was a monetary loan, and filed a provisional attachment against the Gangnam-gu Seoul Building D in the name of the Deceased (Seoul Central District Court 2017Kadan30570), and received a provisional attachment order on February 3, 2017 from the said court.

C. Meanwhile, the deceased’s heir renounced inheritance to the deceased, and on November 3, 2017, the Plaintiff applied for the appointment of an administrator of inherited property on the ground that the existence of the heir’s property is unclear.

On February 9, 2018, the Seoul Family Court (Seoul Family Court Decision 2017Ra855) decided to appoint the Defendant as an administrator of inherited property as the deceased, and the said decision became final and conclusive around that time.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that the Plaintiff lent KRW 5 million to the deceased who made his/her repayment due on October 30, 2016, through the instant remittance. Since the deceased died without paying the above loan, the Defendant, an administrator of inherited property of the deceased, is liable for the said loan to the Plaintiff.