1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. On March 20, 2015, the Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion: (a) donated KRW 180 million out of the purchase price under the F apartment Nos. 101 and 1303 (hereinafter “instant apartment”); (b) subsequently, E did not perform the duty to support the Plaintiff; (c) rescinded the above-paid donation contract; and (d) sought payment of the money as stated in the purport of the claim against the Defendants, the heir of E, as restitution.

2. In light of the following circumstances in determining whether to grant a non-paid donation, it is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff’s donation of KRW 180 million to E is a non-paid donation provided for the support of the Plaintiff, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

In addition to the Plaintiff, there are other children in South and North Korea (Seoul, H, I, and Samnam G), and they also received a lot of property from J and the Plaintiff.

They do not seem to have received property as the condition of parents’ support, and do not seem to have supported the plaintiff while living together with the plaintiff (the plaintiff seems to have resided together). There are no special circumstances to deem that the plaintiff was donated property under the condition of support for the plaintiff by the plaintiff by the second e0,000 U.S.

At the time of the donation, E was suffering from liverization, and was actually dead on July 3, 2017.

In this respect, it is difficult to see that the plaintiff was given a gift under the condition that the plaintiff would receive support from the future E.

In addition, the plaintiff's assertion itself is that E was not very good from the time of birth and was engaged in an act of abolished to his/her parents and siblings.