1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Determination on the claim for restitution following the cancellation of non-paid donation

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is the mother of Defendant C, and the Defendants are married.

The Plaintiff donated KRW 98,413,936 to the Defendant B’s account on November 30, 2012 and December 7, 2012, on condition that the Defendants support the Plaintiff, but donated KRW 98,413,936 on two occasions.

Since the Defendants did not perform their duty to support the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff is released from the above gift agreement.

Defendant B is obligated to return to the Plaintiff KRW 98,413,936 as the restitution following the rescission of the gift contract and the statutory interest thereon.

B. The evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to acknowledge that the Plaintiff’s donation of cash to Defendant B was a gift with a burden on the condition that the Defendants support the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Therefore, the plaintiff's above assertion against the defendant B is without merit.

2. Determination as to the claim related to the land sale price

A. The Plaintiff, as a joint tortfeasor, has delegated the Defendants with the sale of 193 square meters and E 91 square meters (hereinafter “instant land”) owned by the Plaintiff, and entrusted the Defendants with the documents necessary for the sale thereof. However, the Defendants, who knew to the Plaintiff, arbitrarily sold the instant land at KRW 73,430,00 on June 16, 2014 and embezzled KRW 42,90,987, which remains after repaying KRW 30,529,013, out of the sale price, with the redemption of KRW 30,529,013, out of the sale price, and embezzled KRW 42,90,987. As such, the Defendants, as joint tortfeasor, are liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the amount equivalent to the purchase price embezzled to the Plaintiff pursuant to Article 760 of the Civil Act.

According to the evidence No. 4, Eul evidence No. 5 through 7, Eul evidence No. 12, Eul evidence No. 12 (including serial numbers), witness F's testimony, and appraiser G's appraisal result, the plaintiff, when selling the land of this case on June 16, 2014, visits the plaintiff to the certified judicial scrivener office together with the defendants.