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

A. On July 31, 2014, the Plaintiff received a decision on performance recommendation to pay to the Plaintiff KRW 10,197,260 per annum and 20% per annum from May 1, 2013 to the date of delivery of the written complaint, and to the date of full payment from the next day to the date of full payment.

B. On July 18, 2014, the registration of ownership transfer was made in the Defendant, who is the wife B from C on the apartment as indicated in the attached list.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion and its determination are the facts of the cause of the instant claim. B, with the intent to anticipate the existence of compulsory execution by the creditors, including the Plaintiff, and to evade this, concluded a donation agreement with the Defendant, one’s own wife, on May 28, 2014, which was the cause of the instant registration, or to purchase the instant real estate under the Defendant’s name with the Defendant for the purpose of evading compulsory execution. The Defendant concluded a sales contract with C on May 28, 2014 in accordance with the said title trust agreement, and asserted that the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Defendant based on the said sales contract. The Defendant asserted that the revocation of the donation contract based on the obligee’s right of revocation and the return of unjust enrichment against the Defendant as a preliminary claim by subrogation as B’s obligee.

However, there is no evidence to acknowledge the conclusion of the gift contract or the title trust agreement as asserted by the plaintiff, and the plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are without merit.

3. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.