1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

On January 15, 1954, the plaintiff completed the marriage report with Nonparty D.

From around 1980, the Plaintiff maintained a de facto marital relationship with the Defendant, and died on January 15, 2015, the Plaintiff reported the marriage with the Defendant on February 10, 2015.

On January 2, 2013, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer stated in the purport of the instant purchase and sale on December 31, 2012 (hereinafter “instant purchase and sale contract”) to the Defendant on the ground that each of the instant real estates was purchased and sold on December 31, 2012.

【Ground of recognition” Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the Defendant’s examination result, and the assertion of the intent of the entire argument as to the determination of the administrative capacity of the Plaintiff at the time of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff was in the state of his/her own administrative capacity, and thus the said sales contract is null and void.

Judgment

The capacity of intention refers to mental ability or intelligence that can reasonably determine the meaning or result of his act based on normal perception and towing, and the existence of capacity of intention must be determined individually in relation to specific legal acts.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da58367, Jan. 15, 2009). According to the Plaintiff’s evidence No. 3, it is recognized that the Plaintiff was a mental evaluation conducted by the Indones Busan Hospital around August 2015, and the mental evaluation report prepared by a clinical psychology specialist at the time was stating that “the Plaintiff was deemed to have been regarded as dementia in the early stage, for instance, due to the Plaintiff’s decline of the proud memory force for about two years prior to the year, and the current state’s ability, memory, and fladial management function.”

According to the above facts, it is difficult to view that the plaintiff has lost completely mental ability or intelligence that can reasonably be determined based on normal perception and the ability to honor the meaning or result of his act at present, and it is also difficult to view that the plaintiff has lost completely his mental ability or intelligence at the time of the instant sales contract.