1. As to the Plaintiff, Defendant C’s KRW 40,909,091, Defendant D, E, F, and G, respectively, and each of the above amounts, respectively.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 8, and 14 (part number omitted) as to the cause of the claim, the fact that the deceased B (the deceased on August 22, 2018, hereinafter "the deceased") agreed to pay KRW 150 million to the plaintiff around March 11, 2010 (hereinafter "the agreement of this case"). The defendant C, as the deceased's spouse, defendant D, E, F, and G, the deceased's children, inheritance (the shares of inheritance, defendant D, E, F, and G 2/11), and the fact that each of the deceased was inherited (the Defendants were entitled to KRW 40,909,09 won (the deceased on August 22, 2018, hereinafter "the deceased"), the Defendants were obligated to pay KRW 1500,000,000 to the Plaintiff at the annual rate of KRW 1710,710,000).

2. Judgment on the defendants' assertion

A. As to the assertion of onerous donation, the Defendants asserted that the agreement of this case constitutes a gift with a burden on the condition that the Plaintiff sees the Deceased, and that the agreement was null and void because the Plaintiff failed to fulfill the condition, but there is no other evidence to support that the agreement of this case was made under the said condition (the Defendant appears to be required on the ground that the content of the books prepared by the Deceased, such as the evidence Nos. 4 and 5, was under the above condition, but the above letters merely appear to be the purport that the deceased would take the role of the guardian in the course of receiving hospital treatment, and are consistent with the above statements No. 7 and No. 12, or part of the evidence No. 2 (8) of the evidence No. 2)] of the Defendants’ above assertion is without merit.

(b).