대여금
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. Basic fact-finding D (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on September 30, 2015, and the Plaintiffs were co-inheritors as co-inheritors, and the Defendant is recognized as having a de facto marital relationship with the deceased prior to the death of the deceased according to the respective descriptions in subparagraphs 3, 4, 1, and 2, and the overall purport of arguments and arguments.
2. The assertion and judgment
A. Plaintiff A asserts that Plaintiff A lent KRW 57,00,000 to the Defendant on April 20, 2015. Thus, Plaintiff A’s assertion that Plaintiff A lent KRW 57,00,000 to the Defendant is difficult to believe this as is, and there is no other evidence that the evidence submitted by the other Plaintiffs alone is insufficient to recognize this.
B. Preliminaryly, the Plaintiffs were entitled to KRW 57,00,000 in cash and KRW 5,000 in cash as active property and KRW 62,00,00 in cash. As the Deceased died, the Plaintiffs’ ownership of the said money was inherited to the Plaintiffs, the heir of the networkD.
Therefore, the defendant asserts that E had 57,00,000 won out of the above money be used for purchasing apartment in the name of E, and that he concealed the above money by failing to comply with the demands of the plaintiffs that clarify the net D's inherited property.
Therefore, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the deceased owned 62,00,000 cash at the time of death.
Plaintiff’s assertion
In light of the factual assertion that the Defendant had E use the apartment in purchasing the apartment under the name of E, the Defendant embezzled cash left to E before the Deceased’s death, and the Plaintiffs’ assertion that the deceased inherited the damage claim of the deceased arising therefrom, the deceased stored KRW 57,00,000 in cash to E, and the Defendant had E purchase the apartment under the name of E by having E purchase the apartment.