beta
Text
1. The defendant B, the U.S. dollars 2.50,000,000,000,000 U.S. dollars, and this shall begin on October 26, 2018.
Reasons
Facts of recognition
On November 18, 1975, the Plaintiff married with Defendant B, the United States of America (hereinafter “Defendant B”), and lived together in the United States.
As the marriage relationship between the Plaintiff and Defendant B becomes worse, the Plaintiff began to enter and reside in the Republic of Korea over 10 years prior to the married couple.
Defendant B asserted to the effect that the Plaintiff was seeking to dispose of a laundry located in “G, San Jse, and H” located in the U.S. Housing ( Address: E, Bank Jse, and F) owned by the Plaintiff. However, considering the fact that the instant commitment is specified in the “house” and there is no evidence to know that the laundry located in the address was sold, the said laundry was not real estate for the purpose of the instant commitment.
B. Around 2015, the Plaintiff demanded the Plaintiff to prepare a power of attorney, and the Plaintiff accepted the delegation on the condition that the Plaintiff would be paid USD 300,000,000, and was issued by the Defendant B with the following instrument of commitment (hereinafter “instant instrument of commitment”).
Defendant B, for a long period of time with the Plaintiff, must implement the following in selling and buying American property.
1. To prevent all expenses incurred in selling houses for a long time;
2. The Plaintiff promises to send USD 300,000 to the Republic of Korea responsible for and to the Plaintiff. In the event of nonperformance, the Plaintiff’s accusation against fraud is filed.
Defendant B’s witness: Plaintiff C’s husband: around April 2015, Defendant B disposed of the above house at USD 1.575,000.
The Plaintiff received USD 50,00 from Defendant B around October 2015.
【In light of the fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence 1-1, Gap's evidence 4, Gap's evidence 7, and one of the above facts of recognition as to the claim against defendant Eul as to the whole purport of the pleadings, the defendant Eul sold the house in the United States owned by the plaintiff together with the plaintiff.