logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 2017.07.19 2016가단33108
상속지분금
Text

1. All claims filed by the plaintiff (appointed party) and the designated parties are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff (appointed party) and the plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The assertion of the plaintiff (appointed) and the designated parties

A. The Selection E is the husband of F, who died on August 15, 2016, and the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the rest of the designated parties (hereinafter the Plaintiffs), and the Defendant are the children of the networkF.

B. The Selection Party E divided KRW 90,000,000, out of the land compensation on December 10, 2013, into three units, and deposited KRW 30,000,000 in three units, under the name of the F, the deposit type, welfare type, fixed-term deposit (livelihood savings), period from October 10 to December 10, 2014; and the interest rate of KRW 2.668% per annum at the educational Dong branch of the Nam-gu Agricultural Cooperative.

C. The Defendant: (a) managed the foregoing deposit by the Appointor E; and (b) made it impossible for F to make a dynamic and verbal fluence with dementia and labor exchange; and (c) removed F’s principal and interest on the said deposit amount from the NAF to the NAC located in Pakistan-si; and (d) made the withdrawal of F’s principal and interest on the said deposit amount.

On August 15, 2016, the networkF died and succeeded to the shares of 3/11 of the designated parties, the plaintiffs (appointed parties) and the appointed parties C, D, and the defendant, respectively, at the share of 2/11.

E. Therefore, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs the money stated in the purport of the claim calculated according to the inherited shares of the principal and interest of the above withdrawal.

2. It is not sufficient to acknowledge the plaintiffs' assertion that the defendant had withdrawn the principal and interest deposited by withdrawing the above principal and interest, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

3. In conclusion, without examining the remaining points, the plaintiffs' claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow