1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

purport, purport, and.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a person who was in a de facto marital relationship for 30 years with the deceased E (the deceased on February 16, 2014, hereinafter “the deceased”) until the deceased died.

B. The Defendants, as siblings of the Deceased, are legal inheritors of the Deceased.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 7, 8, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On November 7, 2006, the Plaintiff paid KRW 60,550,000 to F’s agent for personal taxi business license acquisition amount to be paid to F (the Plaintiff’s submission is indicated as “G” but it appears to be “F” according to the statement in subparagraph 1).

B. In addition, on March 12, 2008, the Plaintiff paid to J KRW 124,000,000 as the purchase fund for the 105th, Dong 1002 (hereinafter “instant real estate”) of the 105th, Seo-gu, Incheon International Apartment No. 105 (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

C. The Plaintiff’s payment of each of the above money on behalf of the deceased is a donation made to the deceased on the condition that the deceased maintains his/her life with a view to maintaining his/her life as a de facto marital spouse and his/her guardian and supporting

Nevertheless, the deceased did not perform his duty to support, such as being under the influence of alcohol, and thus, the Plaintiff cancelled the above-paid donation contract on the ground of the deceased’s failure to perform his duty to support.

Therefore, the Defendants, who succeeded to the duty of restitution upon the rescission of the onerous donation contract, should jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff a total of KRW 184,550,000 (=60,550,000) and interest interest in arrears.

3. According to each of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 9, 11, and 19, the deceased decided to take over a personal taxi business license from F on November 7, 2006. From the account under the plaintiff's name, F's agent H was paid a total of KRW 60,50,000 ( KRW 10,000,000 on November 7, 2006; KRW 20,000,000 on October 22, 200,000 on the same month; KRW 50,000 on the same month; and KRW 50,000 on the same month).