beta
Text
1. The Defendants are to the Plaintiff:
A. As to the deposits listed in the separate sheet, the Plaintiff jointly with the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 30, 1997, the Plaintiff and E entered into a mining business partnership agreement (hereinafter “instant business partnership agreement”) and operated F and G as a partnership business.
B. On June 9, 1999, the Plaintiff and E opened a deposit account (hereinafter “the instant deposit account”) in the attached list of the Plaintiff and Korea Bank Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Korea Bank”) under the joint name of the Plaintiff and E for the management of mine operation funds, etc., and have jointly used and managed it.
C. On May 5, 2007, during the existence of the instant trade agreement, E died on May 5, 2007, and Defendant C and D, the wife of the network E, jointly inherited their property.
However, the deposit account of this case is prohibited from paying by the defendants.
The suspension of payment has been suspended according to the request.
E. The balance of the deposit deposited in the instant deposit account (hereinafter “instant deposit”) is KRW 436,535,831 as of October 21, 2015, and the share of the Plaintiff and the network E is 1/2.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 4 (including a raid number), Eul's 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. (1) The Plaintiff’s primary assertion (1) concluded the instant partnership agreement with the deceased E, and opened, jointly used, and managed the instant deposit account for the management of its operating funds. As the Defendants jointly inherited the deceased’s property as a result of the death of E, the Defendants, as a joint right holder of the instant deposit account, perform the procedures for claiming the return of the deposit along with the Plaintiff, and distribute 1/2 of the Plaintiff’s share to the Plaintiff.
(2) The conjunctive claim is likely to not pay the settlement amount even if the deposit of this case was withdrawn, such as requesting the suspension of payment for the deposit account of this case and demanding the settlement of mining rights. Thus, the Defendants are entitled to 1/2 of the Plaintiff’s share out of the deposit of this case.