1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The plaintiff is the father of the defendant.

B. The Plaintiff leased the lease deposit amount of KRW 2500,00,000, to the Defendant, on the other hand, D apartment and 115 Dong-dong 402 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) in the name of the wife C, which had been residing with the wife, and received KRW 120,000,000 among them.

The Defendant created a house with the above donated money as a whole, and the Plaintiff and C resided in the house created by the Defendant together with the Defendant’s husband and wife from that time.

C. Since then, the Plaintiff received additional KRW 70 million from the lessee by increasing the deposit for lease of the instant apartment, and donated KRW 60 million among them to the Defendant.

B. (B) The Defendant, together with KRW 120 million as indicated in the above paragraph (hereinafter “instant gift”). On July 11, 2014, on the following grounds: (a) purchased an existing lease deposit, KRW 60 million additionally donated from the Plaintiff; (b) on July 11, 2014, the Defendant purchased the Young-gu E apartment 2604 Dong 304 in the name of the Defendant; and (c) the Plaintiff and C resided with the Defendant’s husband and wife as a director of the said house prepared by the Defendant.

On June 2016, the Plaintiff sold the instant apartment to another and owned the sales price of KRW 60 million (the remaining money after returning the deposit for lease from the sale price). However, in the course of a divorce lawsuit with C and C, the Plaintiff agreed to divide the property into KRW 35 million and KRW 25 million and divorce.

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

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff donated KRW 180 million to the Defendant on the condition that “the Defendant supports the Plaintiff until the Plaintiff died.”

However, the defendant not only failed to comply with the duty to support the plaintiff, such as not viewing the plaintiff who is not good in health conditions and not providing balanced meals to the plaintiff, but also failed to perform the duty to support the plaintiff. On September 7, 2016, the plaintiff is driving away from the defendant's house.