beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff, Defendant B, and Defendant C and D, respectively, as to KRW 39,714,286 and each of the said money from October 9, 2014.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff wired KRW 5 million to the account designated by E and E on December 27, 201; KRW 7 million on February 3, 2012; KRW 50 million on April 3, 2012; KRW 50 million on April 19, 2012; KRW 25 million on July 24, 2012; KRW 50 million on October 30, 2012; KRW 169 million on December 17, 2012; and KRW 30 million on February 14, 2014.
B. E (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on March 28, 2014, and there was Plaintiff C and D, the wife of which was the Plaintiff B and C.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's 1 through 3 evidence, Gap's 5 through 7 evidence (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments
2. Determination as to the cause of claim
A. The plaintiff asserts that as seen earlier, the plaintiff is a loan of KRW 169 million paid to the deceased, and that only KRW 30 million was paid from the deceased on February 14, 2014 and the remaining KRW 139 million was not paid. The defendants, co-inheritors of the deceased, are liable to pay the plaintiff the above loan of KRW 139 million and delay damages therefrom according to their inheritance shares.
The Defendants asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff was in an internal relationship with the Deceased, and that the money transferred to the account of the Deceased was not a loan but a donation.
B. The following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence mentioned above, Gap evidence No. 4, witness G testimony, defendant B's results of the examination, and the purport of the whole arguments are acknowledged as follows: ① The plaintiff does not seem to have a special human relation to the deceased to the extent that the plaintiff donated a large amount of KRW 169 million to the deceased due to the female students of G, a high school of the deceased, and the records of the evidence No. 1 and No. 2 are insufficient to deem that the defendant associates with the deceased; ② the deceased returned KRW 30 million to the plaintiff on February 14, 2014, and ③ the defendant B returned to the deceased on February 14, 2014.