A. Between May 12, 2011 and July 23, 2014, the networkF transferred a total of KRW 223 billion to an account in the name of Defendant C, the spouse of Defendant B.

B. On December 11, 2018, the deceased on December 11, 2018 (hereinafter “the deceased”), and accordingly, the Plaintiff A and his/her children who are his/her spouse, D, and E jointly inherited the deceased. The statutory inheritance portion is 3/7, Selection D, and E, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The Deceased lent KRW 223,00,000 to the Defendants at 23.67% per annum. On December 11, 2018, the Deceased died, and the Plaintiff, the inheritor of the Deceased, succeeded to the claim against the Defendants at 3/7, the designated parties D, and E in proportion to 2/7, respectively. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 95,571,428, the designated parties D, and E the delay damages therefrom. (2) Defendant C operated the “G” in its name with the Defendant, and the Defendant B borrowed KRW 23,00,000 from the Deceased’s account in the name of the Defendant “G” to use it as the business fund. The act of the Defendant C made use of the name “G” to enable the Defendant B to use the name “G.”

Therefore, Defendant C is jointly and severally liable with Defendant B to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 223 million and damages for delay, depending on the liability of the nominal lender under Article 24 of the Commercial Act.

B. It was true that Defendant B received KRW 223 million from the Deceased. However, the said money was not borrowed as the money received from the Deceased as investment in the said G while Defendant B operated “G,” and there is no fact that Defendant B entered into an annual interest agreement on KRW 23.67% with respect to the deceased and the said KRW 223 million.

C. Defendant C is only the fact that Defendant C had an account under his name available for use by Defendant B.