손해배상 등 청구
1. The plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant C shall be dismissed.
2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is dismissed.
3...
1. Basic facts (applicable for recognition: Fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, each entry into evidence of subparagraphs 1 through 3, and purport of the whole pleadings);
A. The Plaintiff’s spouse D lent KRW 100 million to E on March 3, 2014, and the Plaintiff’s spouse D determined KRW 90 million on September 18, 2014 as interest KRW 900,000 per month.
(hereinafter “instant loan”). (b)
E A. On March 14, 2018, the deceased (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), and Defendant B, as the deceased’s spouse, filed a declaration of renunciation of inheritance with the Busan Family Court 2018Radan1471 on April 30, 2018, and the said court rendered a decision to accept the declaration on May 8, 2018.
On the other hand, Defendant C is the child of Defendant B.
2. Determination as to the claim against the defendant B
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (the cause of selective claim) ① Lending the instant loan to the Deceased on behalf of the Plaintiff or as an administrator of the Plaintiff’s absentee under Article 22 of the Civil Act.
Although D did not indicate that it is for the plaintiff, the deceased knew or could have known that D lent it as the plaintiff's agent.
However, inasmuch as Defendant B, after the death of the deceased, renounced inheritance, but the deceased did not intentionally enter the name property of the deceased in the property list, and fraudulently consumed and consumed the concealed name property, it shall be deemed that the mere approval was made pursuant to Article 1026 of the Civil Act.
Therefore, Defendant B, as the inheritor of the Deceased, is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the instant loan amounting to KRW 25 million (i.e., KRW 110 million (i., KRW 90 million) and the interest amounting to KRW 25 million on KRW 90 million (22.5 million) and damages for delay.
② Defendant B and the Deceased, although they were unable to repay money by borrowing money, were unable to release the Plaintiff detained at the time, and if they were to lend money to the Plaintiff and D, they would release the Plaintiff, and borrowed the instant loan.
However, since the loan of this case was paid out of the plaintiff's property, the defendant B committed the above illegal act against the plaintiff.