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. On September 16, 2017, the Plaintiff issued KRW 20,000,000 to the Defendants, who are the private money, a cashier’s checks of KRW 19,000 and cash KRW 1,00,000.

B. On January 11, 2018, D, the Defendants’ children, filed a lawsuit, including divorce, against the Plaintiff’s children E, and on April 4, 2019, the Daegu Family Court rendered a decision that “the Plaintiff (D) and the Defendant (E) are divorced” to the Daegu Family Court Kimcheon-Support 2018Ddan10125, and the appeal is pending at the appellate court (Seoul Family Court 2019Reu5468).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 12 evidence, Eul 1 evidence (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff lent KRW 20 million at the request of the Defendants, and the Defendants should pay the above money and damages for delay upon the Plaintiff’s request for reimbursement. Even if the Plaintiff’s payment of the above money was to be a donation, the Plaintiff’s delivery of the said money was limited to the condition that the marriage relationship between the Plaintiff and his/her father is maintained, but thereafter, the said donation should be revoked as a juristic act by mistake or deception, or the conditions for cancellation were completed.

In addition, the Plaintiff granted KRW 20 million to the Defendants on the condition that they would be used as attorney-at-law fees. However, since the Defendants did not use them as attorney-at-law fees, the Defendants should return the said money to the Plaintiff in accordance with the non-performance of the terms and conditions.

As above, the plaintiff paid the above money with the knowledge that it will be used as attorney-at-law fees, but did not so, the plaintiff's declaration of intention of donation is revoked on the ground of mistake.

B. The money that the Plaintiff paid to the Defendants is not a loan.

The plaintiff's fraudulent E, which is the plaintiff's deception, uses the seals of the defendant's wife D, thereby establishing a joint and several surety for his own debt, and defendant C and the defendants.