A. On October 16, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C seeking a loan under this Court 2014Gahap100347, and was sentenced by the said court to “C shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount equivalent to KRW 139 million, KRW 30% per annum from April 1, 2013 to July 31, 2014, and KRW 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.” It was finalized as is.

B. On September 13, 2010, the Defendant newly registered as the owner of D (fishing vessel E; hereinafter “instant vessel”).

(c) C is currently in excess of its obligations.

The Plaintiff asserted that the actual owner of the instant vessel is C, and filed the instant lawsuit against the Defendant on behalf of C, by subrogation, to terminate the title trust on the instant vessel. A duplicate of the instant complaint stating the said declaration of intention was served on the Defendant on September 13, 2016.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including additional number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. First of all, we examine whether the title trust agreement on the instant vessel was made.

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statements and arguments set forth in Gap's Evidence Nos. 4, 5, 9, 10, Eul evidence Nos. 1, 6, 9 through 13, and 16 through 19, Eul borrowed from the plaintiff during the period from April 16, 2010 to October 19, 2010, KRW 139 million from the plaintiff living together with the defendant at the time of living. ② The defendant purchased the Fund on April 7, 2010, sold KRW 34 million to G on July 16, 2010, after purchasing the H on July 16, 2010, it appears that Eul purchased the above vessel at the expense of credit or processing the vessel, and it appears that C actually purchased the vessel under the name of the defendant's name and management at the investigation agency. < Amended by Act No. 10373, Jul. 26, 2010>