Where a term deposit is made in the name of the attached office, the subject of the term deposit;

If the time deposit is created under the name of the wife by contributing additional funds, the contributors and the deposit holders of the time deposit will be the father, and if there is no evidence of the fact that the time deposit was created or the deposit was made by donation to the wife, the wife is merely the deposit holders under the name of the deposit holders, and the actual deposit holders are contributing the funds, and the deposit is made.

Article 702 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff-Appellee et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee

[Defendant-Appellee] Korea Industrial Bank of Korea

Seoul High Court Decision 86Na2154 delivered on November 16, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged that there was no dispute over the fact that the term deposit amount of KRW 30,00,000 with an interest rate of KRW 10% per annum at the inner branch of the Defendant Bank on May 28, 1982, and 35,548,635 won remaining after deducting interest and discount fees from the fixed-term deposit amount of KRW 36,51,000 at the face value from the inner branch of the Defendant Bank on May 28, 1982, the non-party who is the husband of the plaintiff on the basis of the macroscopic evidence was at the face value of KRW 36,51,00 from the fixed-term deposit amount of KRW 36,548,635 in his ordinary deposit account, and then withdrawn KRW 30,000,000 per annum to the plaintiff's account holder or the non-party's bank deposit holder under the above name of the non-party on the premise that the above bank deposit holder and the non-party's deposit account are non-party.

In light of the records, the above measures of the court below are just and acceptable, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the mistake of facts or offset against the rules of evidence, such as the incomplete deliberation or the violation of the rules of evidence.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee B-soo (Presiding Justice)