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

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C, etc. with the Seoul Central District Court 2006Gahap19806, and on October 25, 2006, the judgment against C, etc. was rendered on October 25, 2006 that “C, jointly with D, jointly and severally with D, shall pay 212,094,569 won per annum 15% per annum from October 27, 2005 to March 21, 2006, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment,” and the judgment against C became final and conclusive at that time.

B. On September 11, 2006, the Defendant, the wife of C, purchased the real estate listed in the separate sheet from E, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on October 20 of the same year.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 through 3 (including virtual numbers) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s husband, C, the Defendant’s husband, concluded a title trust agreement with the Defendant and borne the purchase price of real estate listed in the separate sheet, and C, even though it is possible to seek unjust enrichment equivalent to the purchase price of real estate against the Defendant on the grounds of termination of a title trust agreement with the Defendant or invalidation of a title trust agreement.

Therefore, the Plaintiff, a creditor of C, claiming unjust enrichment equivalent to the real estate purchase fund by subrogation of C, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of KRW 73,000,000,000, which deducts a new bank loan from the real estate purchase price of KRW 173,00,000, and damages for delay.

B. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone is insufficient to recognize the fact that the Defendant entered into a title trust agreement with C on the real estate listed in the separate sheet, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is dismissed as it is without merit.