beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.
2. All costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Determination on the cause of the claim
A. On December 8, 2009, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion lent KRW 100,000,000 to the network E, and the network E died without paying the above loan. Since Defendant B, Defendant C, and D, the spouse of the Plaintiff, succeeded to the rate of 3/7, 2/7, 2/7, and 2/7, each of the property of the network E, the Plaintiff sought payment of each of the above loans to the Defendants, the heir of the network E, by inheritance shares.
B. According to the reasoning of each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 6, the result of the order to submit each of the financial transaction information to the HSBC bank of this court, and the Korean bank, the whole purport of the arguments is as follows: (i) on December 8, 2009, the network E withdraws KRW 100,000 from the Plaintiff’s HSBC bank account (Account Number:F) to the check (section 2 of 50,00,000), and the relevant check was presented at the Korean bank pressure control point on the following day; (ii) on March 6, 2014, the network E died on March 6, 2014; and (iii) the fact that Defendant C and D, the spouse of the deceased, was each recognized.
However, in full view of the following facts: (a) although the Plaintiff asserted that KRW 100,00,000 withdrawn from the Plaintiff’s account was lent to the network E, there is no assertion as to important matters under the general loan agreement, such as the time and interest rate for the return of the loan; (b) there is no disposition document verifying the fact of the loan; (c) even if the financial transaction information is given, it is insufficient to deem the loan as the loan; and (d) there is no evidence that the Plaintiff demanded the net E or the Defendants to pay the above KRW 100,000,000 in the Plaintiff’s account even after a considerable period of time has elapsed from the time of loan as alleged by the Plaintiff; and (b) there is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.
The Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants, which differs from this premise, is without merit.