1. As to KRW 345,00,000 and KRW 85,000 among the Plaintiff, the Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff the year from April 11, 2018 to December 11, 2018.

1. Basic facts

A. The Deceased’s purchase of each of the instant apartment buildings (JJ date, and died on September 3, 2015; hereinafter “the deceased”) frequently visited Korea for business purposes;

On December 19, 198, the D Apartment E (hereinafter “D Apartment”) located on the land outside Jung-gu Seoul, Jung-gu, and one parcel of land was purchased as K Housing Redevelopment Association, and on June 22, 2001, G Apartment H (hereinafter “instant G apartment”) located in F at the time of leisure water was purchased from L Co., Ltd. from L Co., Ltd., and the registration of ownership transfer was completed with respect to the instant G apartment by lending the name of the Defendant, the second child of the deceased, not the deceased, in the name of the deceased, and with respect to the instant D apartment, on February 25, 2003.

B. In around 2005, the Plaintiff and the Deceased’s related Plaintiff developed the Deceased as a shot-in relationship by introducing M around August 2005, and began living together in the instant D Apartment from around August 2005.

From that time, the Plaintiff saw the Deceased who was suffering from a disease, such as high blood pressure, etc. at the urology. From that time, the Plaintiff saw the Deceased as unconstitutional even after the Deceased was conducted a fluoral surgery on the grounds of dynamic cluorrosis, etc. around 2009, and his daily life due to the cluoral symptoms, he saw the Deceased as having a health condition to the extent that he was unable to live without

During that period, the Deceased was born to Japan on August 30, 201, and the health has deteriorated, making it difficult to return to Korea. On May 2012, the currency with the Plaintiff was finally closed contact.

C. As of March 20, 201, each of the instant apartments, “as of March 20, 201, when the Plaintiff and the Deceased were living together,” was owned by the Deceased by lending the name of the Defendant, and the Deceased promised to transfer each of the instant apartments to the Plaintiff.

In addition, the loan certificate between the deceased and the plaintiff is likely to cause a tax problem.