The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

In light of the purport of the whole pleadings and the result of the examination of evidence, the court shall render a judgment of the fact-finding with free conviction in accordance with logical and empirical rules on the basis of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, so long as it does not exceed the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence, the value judgment and fact-finding belong to the discretion of the fact-finding court, and the

(Article 202 and Article 432 of the Civil Procedure Act. According to the circumstances stated in its holding, the lower court determined that, at the time of opening each of the instant savings accounts, it is reasonable to view that there was a clear agreement between B and the Defendant, by denying the right to claim the return of the deposit with the Plaintiff et al. and entering into a deposit contract with the Plaintiff et al. and to vest in B, the right to claim the return of the deposit, which is premised on the Plaintiff’s right to claim the return of the deposit

The allegation in the grounds of appeal disputing such judgment of the court below is merely an error in the value judgment and fact-finding of evidence belonging to the free trial of the court of fact-finding.

In addition, examining the reasoning of the judgment below in light of the aforementioned legal principles and the legal principles as to the interpretation of the party to the deposit contract as stated in the judgment below, the judgment below did not err in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the confirmation of the party to the deposit contract, the ownership of the right to claim the return of deposit, the duty of care of the financial institution,

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party.