1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On February 15, 2012, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed in the name of the Defendant with respect to the instant vessel, for which the transfer of ownership was registered under C’s name.

B. On December 2011, the Defendant sold the D’s “D” vessel to Nonparty E, the Plaintiff owned the F’s vessel around February 2012, and the original Defendant was friendly.

C. On February 14, 2012, the Plaintiff requested issuance of 1 million won cashier’s checks at the territorial jurisdiction of the Jinhae-do, and the 24th cashier’s checks issued by the said bank were paid to C around February 2012.

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, entry of Gap Nos. 1, 5, and 6, and the purport of the whole pleading of Eul No. 2

2. The parties' assertion

A. On March 2012, the Plaintiff paid KRW 24 million to the former owner C of the instant vessel with the purchase price of the instant vessel, and purchased and title trust the instant vessel to the Defendant.

However, the defendant disputes the above title trust. Since the contract on title trust is terminated by the delivery of a duplicate of the complaint of this case, the defendant is obliged to implement each procedure to transfer ownership of the ship of this case and change the name of fishery permission.

(The plaintiff does not explicitly assert the termination of the above title trust at the complaint of this case, but in light of the purport of the entire complaint of this case, the plaintiff will do so). (B)

Defendant did not lend the title of transfer registration of ownership of the instant vessel to the Plaintiff, but paid to the Plaintiff an amount equivalent to KRW 28 million from the D sale price of the instant vessel owned by the Plaintiff for the purchase of F owned by the Plaintiff, but the Plaintiff purchased the instant vessel from C on February 15, 2012 and completed the transfer registration of ownership in its own name because the Plaintiff did not transfer F’s ownership, and paid the Plaintiff the purchase price of the instant vessel upon return of KRW 24 million from among the money paid by the Plaintiff as F. The Plaintiff asserted that he is the actual owner of the instant vessel.