voor te houden dat uit de correspon

voor te houden dat uit de correspondentie van de notaris zou blijken dat partijen op 24mei 2014(?)een vereffening-verdeling voorzien zouden hebben mits een opleg van 80,000€ terwiji de notaris net het tegenovergestelde zegt en er zelfs nooit een ontwerp van vereffening-verdeling werd opgesteld waarin een opleg van 80,000€ werd vermeld;

結果 (英語) 1:

to keep that from the correspondence of the notary would show that parties on 24mei 2014 (?) a settlement would have provided a distribution with lay-on by 80,000 € whereas the notary says just the opposite and there never even a draft settlement distribution was drawn up in which a lay-on by 80,000 € was mentioned;

結果 (英語) 2:

us to believe that it would appear from the correspondence of the notary that the parties 24mei 2014 (?) would have a liquidation distribution feature if a surcharge of € 80,000 terwiji notary just say the opposite and never even a draft of liquidation distribution that planned a surcharge of € 80,000 was mentioned;

結果 (英語) 3:

For that from the correspondence of the notary would prove that the parties on 24 May 2014 ( ? )a settlement-distribution provided would have provided that a last minute of 80,000€ terwiji the notary says exactly the opposite and there never even a draft of settlement-distribution was drawn up in which a last minute of 80,000€ stated;