1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Status 1) G (Death on March 26, 2015, hereinafter “the deceased”)

(2) Defendant C, D, E, and F are children of Nonparty K.

3) Of the deceased’s inherited property, the Plaintiff, and Defendant B inherited 1/6 shares, respectively, and the Defendants C, D, E, and F inherited 1/24 shares on behalf of the deceased. B. The Plaintiff wired KRW 10 million to the account in the deceased’s name on May 8, 2009, and KRW 50 million on May 29, 2009, respectively. On February 17, 2015, the Plaintiff visited Seosan National Agricultural Cooperative, together with the Deceased, visited Seosan National Agricultural Cooperative to pay KRW 40 million in the name of the deceased, with the face value of KRW 40 million on a cashier’s checks issued on February 12, 2015, and the Plaintiff changed the name of the Saemaeul National Agricultural Cooperative to the name of the Seosan National Agricultural Cooperative (the name of the Seosan National Agricultural Cooperative was changed, but the name was changed.

3,547,735 won in total of the loans owed by the deceased in the name of the deceased for Seosansan A. [Grounds for recognition] The records in Gap's No. 1, 3, 6, 7, and 15 (including serial numbers), including the fact fact fact inquiries in the first instance court, the purport of the entire pleadings, as a whole.

2. Determination on the claim for reimbursement by subrogation

A. The Plaintiff’s summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that, from October 22, 2014 to April 12, 2016, the Plaintiff repaid 53,547,735 won in total in the name of the deceased, on behalf of the deceased, to the Chungcheong Saemaul Savings Depository and Seosan Agricultural Cooperatives. As such, the Defendants, the deceased’s heir, are obligated to return the amount equivalent to the above loan obligation and the damages for delay acquired by the deceased’s unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff in proportion to their inheritance shares.

B. Determination 1) The Plaintiff’s repayment of loan obligations under the name of the deceased on behalf of the deceased is as seen earlier. If the Plaintiff repaid the Plaintiff’s debt on behalf of the deceased without any internal relationship, the deceased would be unjust enrichment. (The Plaintiff did an act of guaranteeing the Plaintiff’s loan obligations, etc.)