beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C and E respectively from December 22, 2005, respectively.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. Defendant B is the spouse of the deceased G on June 25, 2014 (hereinafter “the deceased”), and Defendant C and E are the children of the deceased.
Evidence of Nos. 2 and 3
1. All payments: Won 200,000,000 won (Won 200,000) shall be borrowed and agreed as follows:
2. foot of loan: October 18, 2005;
3. Date of repayment: December 21, 2005.
4. In principle, compensation for the full amount of a loan shall be paid when the date set for the loan exceeds the date;
on October 18, 2006: The name of the borrower on October 18, 2006: G H number of residents in Ulsan-gu: I
B. The loan certificate held by the Plaintiff is indicated as follows:
A Evidence of No. 1
C. Among the statement of “6 October 18, 2006,” the date on which the loan certificate of this case was drawn up, the roadside 6 was written to the upper part of “6” in the Arabic figure of the year drawn up, and the “6” was modified to “5.”
On the other hand, even at the bottom of ‘8' of the Arabic numeral numeral numeral numeral Roster on the date of preparation, the vertical numeral numeral was written, but there was no change in other numbers.
As a result of the appraiser J's appraisal, 【Ground for Recognition】 There is no dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3, the result of the appraiser J's appraisal, and the purport of whole pleadings.
2. The Defendants’ assertion (1) unlike other monetary transactions between the Plaintiff and the Deceased, there is no financial transaction to recognize that the Plaintiff lent KRW 200 million to the Deceased, or that there is no financial transaction to recognize that the Plaintiff paid interest to the Plaintiff. ② The loan certificate of this case does not include the signature of the Deceased or the lender, ③ There is no fact that the Plaintiff lent KRW 200 million as of October 18, 2006 or October 18, 2005, indicated as of the date on which the loan certificate of this case was drawn up, and there is no consistency in the Plaintiff’s assertion on the loan certificate of this case. ④ The loan certificate of this case was corrected by the writing date of the loan certificate of this case, and ⑤ The loan certificate of this case was corrected by the writing of the loan certificate of this case.