beta
Text
1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.
Purport of claim and appeal
1.
Reasons
1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the court's ruling is as stated in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since it is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for adding the judgment of the court of first instance pursuant to Paragraph 2.
The 6th of the decision of the first instance court is the "Witness H and G" of the 4th of the decision of the first instance court as "H and G".
On the six pages of the judgment of the first instance court, the following one shall be the thickness.
In the 7th sentence of the first instance court, the "date of this decision" shall be "date of pronouncement of the first instance court".
2. According to the purport of the evidence Nos. 8, 11, 12, and 13 as well as the overall purport of the pleadings, Defendant B, who worked as an intern of the Rmedical Center at around March 1990 (hereinafter “in 1996, the “in-house Council member”). The income of Defendant B, as its mother, can be acknowledged that the Defendants were managed immediately after April 199, by K, even after the marriage of the Defendants.
However, comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged earlier, Gap evidence Nos. 10, 11, 14, and Eul evidence Nos. 9, and Eul evidence Nos. 125,60,000, which were transferred from March 2006 to defendant C’s account from April 201, by paying a total of KRW 150,627,301 to the defendants around November 2003, when the plaintiff died, as seen earlier, it is reasonable to determine that the sum of KRW 125,60,00, which the plaintiff transferred from March 206 to the defendant C’s account from April 201, as the defendants were jointly and severally liable.
① Until the Defendants were married, both the Plaintiff and K assumed expenses for opening a hospital, living expenses, etc. of “B” and Defendant B had operated the said “building located in Kuwon-si” which was substantially managed by the Plaintiff and K, but did not pay rent, etc. to the Plaintiff, etc. at all.
② Defendant B shall be from the Plaintiff around November 2003, 150,627.