1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) B, which falls under the following amount ordering payment with respect to a counterclaim.

Under the underlying facts, Defendant B is the wife of the deceased E (hereinafter “the deceased”), and Defendant C and D are the offspring of the deceased, and the Defendants are the inheritors of the deceased.

From June 1, 2017 to September 6, 2017, the Plaintiff remitted KRW 30,972,700 to the deceased’s account.

The Plaintiff, prepared by the Deceased from June 201 to September 2017, holds the certificate of borrowing (No. 1; hereinafter “the certificate of borrowing of this case”) on October 2, 2017, stating that “The Plaintiff borrowed KRW 40 million from the Plaintiff several times from the Plaintiff.”

On October 31, 2017, the Deceased died, and the Defendants received a report of inheritance limited recognition from the Daejeon Family Court as the Daejeon Family Court Decision 2018 Mo10015 on April 9, 2018.

However, as active property at the time of the above repair, only real estate and the FF associations, the Korea Inclusive Finance Agency, G Bank, and H associations have reported only claims.

After that, the Defendants filed an application for correction with the Daejeon Family Court for the addition of retirement allowances (33,930,030 won) to the Government Employees Pension Service as active property in the list of inherited property, and the claim for damages against the I Federation (259,427,781 won, part of a lawsuit), and the said court rendered a decision of correction on June 8, 2018.

[Based on the basis of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 (the fingerprint appraisal by the appraiser J of the first instance court is recognized that the fingerprints located on the right to the signature of the deceased is by the deceased's unmanned, and therefore the authenticity of the entire document is recognized), Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1 and 5, each statement in the evidence No. 1 and 5, and the entire purport of the pleading, and the reasons for this decision are as stated in Paragraph 2 of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance court, except that the court considers "the case" in the fourth 9th 9th of the judgment of the first instance as "the first instance court".

(The main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act) The grounds for this part of the court’s assertion by the Defendants as to a counterclaim and its determination are stated in this part of the judgment of the court of first instance.

For the purposes of this subsection:

(The main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act) Determination of Defendant B’s claim.