1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 2, 2004, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with Defendant B to purchase KRW 160,000,000 from Nam-gu, Busan (hereinafter “the instant loan”) for the purchase of KRW 201,00,000 from Defendant B (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”), and deposited KRW 50,000,000 with the expenses for cancellation of the right to collateral security established on the instant loan loan, instead of paying the down payment.

B. Defendant C paid KRW 50,000,000 to flus Mutual Savings Bank, Inc., a collateral security (former Mutual Savings Bank, Ltd., the same mutual savings bank), and on July 27, 2004, the registration of creation of a collateral security in the name of the foregoing Savings Bank was cancelled.

C. The real estate of this case is title trust with the Asian Trust Co., Ltd., which was held in title trust with the non-party Eul, and the defendant Eul was established a voluntary mediation between the Asian Trust and the defendant Eul on Feb. 4, 2003 to receive the transfer of ownership due to the payment of KRW 50,000,000. The performance of the obligation to repay KRW 50,000 upon the above voluntary mediation, the performance of the obligation to transfer ownership of the defendant Eul, the performance of the obligation to transfer ownership of the Asian Trust, and the implementation of the ownership transfer registration of the defendant Eul as a result of the contract of this case, and the execution of the ownership transfer registration of the plaintiff as to the plaintiff of this case directly from the non-party Eul on July 5, 2004, the ownership transfer registration of the real estate of this case was completed on July 2, 2004.

On the other hand, Nonparty F and G filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiff, Asia Construction and Defendant B by Busan District Court Branch of 2004Kadan16749 against the Plaintiff, Inc., and the Plaintiff Company B seeking the implementation of the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer regarding the instant loan. The above court held on April 6, 2006 that, instead of the payment of KRW 190,000,000 for the instant loan construction work, the instant contract was concluded on the premise that: (a) the Plaintiff and Defendant B had the prior obligation to pay for the instant loan in lieu of the payment of KRW 190,00,000 for the instant loan construction work; and (b) the instant contract was concluded on October 13, 1995.