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

A. The deceased A (hereinafter “the deceased”) died without the heir on December 18, 2007. In light of the fact that at the time, the Plaintiff filed a claim for return of KRW 562,133,462 with the new bank at the time, and KRW 125,80,995 with the Han Bank, the Plaintiff asserted that the amount of deposit, etc. against the Han Bank is KRW 175,80,995 ( KRW 125,80,995 + KRW 50,0000). However, in the specification of transactions (Evidence 6) issued by the Han Bank, the actual payment is stated as KRW 125,80,995, and the Plaintiff also claimed for return of KRW 125,80,995, such as a deposit against the Han Bank. In light of the fact that the Plaintiff filed a claim for return against the Han Bank, the amount of deposit, etc. in the Han Bank appears to be KRW 125,800,95,95.

Our Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Co., Ltd.”) had each of the financial instruments, such as deposits, funds, etc. (hereinafter referred to as “deposits, etc.”) in KRW 114,358,880.

B. The Defendants, upon receipt of a proposal from E, who was aware of the deceased’s death without the heir, withdrawn the deceased’s deposits, etc. and divided them on April 2009, forged the official document by stating them as their children in the family relation certificate of the deceased, and then, submitted the forged official document to a new bank and Hana Bank, which may know of such circumstances, withdrawn the deceased’s deposits, etc., and Defendant C withdrawn the deceased’s deposits, etc. from our bank in the above manner.

다. F은 망인의 5촌 조카인 자로서 역시 망인이 상속인 없이 사망한 사실을 알고 망인의 재산을 가로챌 목적으로 2009. 1.경 ‘망인의 재산을 모두 F에게 상속한다’는 내용의 망인 명의의 상속확인서(이하 ‘이 사건 상속확인서’라고 한다)를 위조하여 서울가정법원에 유언집행자 선임을 청구하였고, 서울가정법원은 2013. 2. 6. 2012느단2007호로 망인의 유언집행자로 변호사 B을 선임하였다. 라.

B The deceased’s deposit against each bank.