2. The plaintiff's primary claim and the conjunctive claim are all dismissed.

3. Action.

A. D A. On July 29, 2002, borrowed KRW 9,000,000 from E Union as of May 14, 2003 and interest rate of KRW 29.2% per annum. D only repaid the principal and interest of KRW 1,696 and July 25, 2002, and the remainder of the principal and interest did not pay.

B. The Plaintiff acquired the above loan claim.

On the other hand, as of March 21, 2018, the amount of non-payment as of March 21, 2018 reaches KRW 49,890,213 including the principal amount of KRW 8,98,304.

C. On April 1, 2016, the Defendant purchased real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant housing”) from F from F for KRW 135,00,000, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 8, 2016.

The purchase price for the instant housing was paid in the following ways:

CH account of KRW 4,00,000, KRW 1,000 on March 28, 2016, 2016, KRW 4,000 on April 1, 2016, CH account of KRW 10,000 on April 1, 2016, and KRW 98,000,000 on April 7, 2016, DIS account of KRW 90,000,00 on April 8, 2016, CJF loan of KRW 90,00,000,000 on KRW 8,00,00,00,000 on KRW 135,00,000 on KRW 135,00,00 on KRW 135,00 on the aggregate,00 on each of the pleadings and arguments / [based on recognition] 1,24,000 on April 29, 2016,

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) and D, under excess of the obligation, donated the Defendant, who is the child, a total of KRW 37,000,000,000, which is the purchase fund of the instant house, to the Defendant and thereby inflicted damage on the general creditor’s interest. Thus, the above donation contract was revoked and the Defendant shall pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 37,00,000 and the delay damages therefrom.

(2) Preliminaryly, D held the title trust of the instant house to the Defendant, and the Defendant obtained unjust enrichment equivalent to the purchase fund without any legal ground.

The plaintiff sought a return of unjust enrichment of KRW 37,00,000, which is the purchase fund, from the defendant in subrogation of D, which is in an insolvent state, in order to preserve the claim against D.

B. The defendant's assertion is that at the time of the purchase of the instant house, 37 million won from D.