1. The part of the instant lawsuit against Defendant E, F, and G shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendant B, C, and D respectively.

1. Basic facts are the mother of the network H (hereinafter “the deceased”). Defendant B and C are the mother of the deceased, Defendant D are the mother of the Defendant B and C, and Defendant D are the former wife of the deceased (the marriage report on March 6, 199, the marriage report on June 1, 2007, the agreement on June 1, 2007).

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination:

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion, without any special occupation, has useful the Plaintiff’s money by threatening the Plaintiff’s knife with knife, etc. while living in the Plaintiff’s trust without any special occupation.

Specifically, on April 30, 2007, I paid KRW 100,000 to the Plaintiff at the hospital expense, and withdrawn the deceased’s real estate investment. The deceased, who was the debtor, was using KRW 20,000,000 on November 8, 2006, KRW 15,000,000,000 on June 23, 201, and KRW 30,000 on August 10, 201. The Plaintiff’s real estate was expropriated and used for personal purposes, but the deceased was useful, and the deceased borrowed KRW 64,00,000 from the Plaintiff and constructed a building on the attached list.

⑴ 피고 B, C에 대한 주장 ㈎ 대여금 청구 위와 같이 원고는 망인에 대하여 대여금 채권을 가지고 있으므로, 망인을 상속한 피고 B, C는 원고에게 위 대여금을 지급할 의무가 있다.

㈏ 건물철거 청구 원고는 경기 연천군 J 대 264㎡, K 대 382㎡를 소유하고 있고, 망인은 원고로부터 공사비를 빌려 위 각 토지에 이 사건 건물을 신축하였다.

Since the Plaintiff terminated a loan for use of the instant land, Defendant B and C, who inherited the deceased, are obligated to remove the said building.

B. The argument on Defendant E, F, and G: (a) the deceased purchased the real estate and held title trust to Defendant E; (b) the Plaintiff paid KRW 120 million to Defendant E with the purchase price; and (c) the deceased paid KRW 79 million to Defendant F for the opening and operating expenses of the Handphone sales store.