1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Basic Facts

On August 16, 1995, the Plaintiff reported a marriage with C on August 16, 1995, and was married and divorced on November 7, 2013, and thereafter, was sentenced to the following judgment on the claim for division of property, etc. against C.

(hereinafter) On August 21, 2015, the court of the first instance rendered a judgment stating that “C shall pay the Plaintiff a property division of KRW 44 million and any damages for delay to the Plaintiff” (Seoul District Court Decision 2014ddan2993 (principal lawsuit), 2014ddan5084 (Counterclaim)).

On October 14, 2016, the appellate court appealed the Plaintiff. On October 14, 2016, the appellate court rendered a judgment that “C shall pay the Plaintiff a property division of KRW 67 million and its delay damages (the principal lawsuit of Incheon Family Court 2015Reu105Reu10590 (Counterclaim))” (the main lawsuit of Incheon Family Court 2015Reu105Reu10590). The main judgment related to the property division was as follows.

As to the point of time of division of property, the subject and value of the division of property shall be determined on the basis of the date of the closing of argument ( August 26, 2016), and in the case of money, the subject and value of the division of property was determined on the basis of October 1, 201, which is the time of

As to the property subject to division of property (hereinafter “the instant money”), the Defendant alleged that C was either reimbursed the amount that C lent to the Defendant prior to the failure of the marital relationship or received benefits for the period of service before the failure of the marital relationship, but the instant money was excluded from the property division on the ground that there is no evidence to deem otherwise. The instant money was excluded from the property division on the grounds that there is no evidence to deem otherwise.

With respect to the ratio of division of property, the plaintiff 40% and 360% were recognized.

On March 9, 2017, the plaintiff appealed, but the court of final appeal rendered a ruling of dismissal [the main lawsuit, 2016Meu12449 (the main lawsuit), 2016Meu12456 (Counterclaim)].

On the other hand, related.