1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 6 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the entire pleadings:

The Plaintiff wired the total amount of KRW 23 million to the deposit account of the pro-Japanese network B (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), KRW 20 million on August 17, 2001, KRW 29 million on March 29, 2002, KRW 70 million on June 18, 2002, KRW 30 million on July 15, 2002, KRW 200 million on August 7, 2002, and KRW 613 billion on August 7, 2002.

B. On January 27, 2011, the Deceased remitted KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff’s deposit account.

C. The Deceased died on December 6, 2016, and the Defendants inherited the Deceased.

2. The parties' assertion

A. Plaintiff 1) The sum of KRW 613 billion transferred by the Plaintiff to the Deceased from August 17, 2001 to August 7, 2002 was leased to the Deceased as a housing construction fund. 2) The amount of KRW 100 million that the Deceased transferred to the Plaintiff on January 27, 2011 was part of the said loan, and the Plaintiff transferred the last loan amount of KRW 200 million from August 7, 2002 to December 7, 2005, to the interest accrued from August 7, 2002 to December 7, 2005.

The above partial performance of the deceased constitutes an approval of the obligation, which is the cause of interruption of extinctive prescription.

The Defendants, who inherited the deceased, are obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the amount corresponding to their respective statutory shares in inheritance (Defendant G204,33,33 won, Defendant E, H, and I each 136,22,222 won) and damages for delay after December 8, 2005, which is the day following the appropriation for performance.

B. Defendants 1) The Deceased received KRW 613 million from the Plaintiff: ① The Deceased’s 2,258 square meters (hereinafter “D land”) on the part of the Plaintiff, via the Plaintiff, to C, who is the Plaintiff’s land.

(2) Even if the Plaintiff borrowed KRW 613 billion to the Deceased, the date of the last lease on August 7, 2002, which is the date of the Plaintiff’s assertion, even if the Plaintiff sold and received part of the purchase money, or was paid the money that the Deceased lent to the Plaintiff before that time, and not the Plaintiff’s lending to the Deceased.