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

A. The fact that the registration of ownership transfer was completed on December 31, 2004 with respect to the housing of Songpa-gu Seoul (hereinafter referred to as the “instant housing for convenience”) where the ownership transfer was completed in the Plaintiff’s future, ① the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the Defendant’s future on December 31, 2004, ② the fact that the registration of ownership transfer (the grounds for registration on November 30, 2004: the “transaction as of November 4, 2005” was completed on November 4, 2015, and the transaction value on the registry: 248 million won on the registry: there is no dispute between the parties.

B. As the cause of the instant claim, the Plaintiff: (a) trusted the instant house to the Defendant around 2004; (b) accordingly, completed the registration of ownership transfer; (c) the Defendant asserted that D disposed of the instant house without permission and unjust enrichment of the amount equivalent to the actual sale price; and (d) filed a claim against the Defendant for the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the remaining amount obtained by subtracting the actual secured debt amount of the right to collateral security established at the time of the disposal from the actual sale price of the instant house at the time of the disposal.

C. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that “the Plaintiff trusted the ownership of the instant house to the Defendant on or around 2004,” and the Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff is liable for tax payment cannot be accepted without further review.

2. Accordingly, we cannot accept the Plaintiff’s claim for restitution of unjust enrichment of this case.