1. The plaintiff (appointed party)'s claim is all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff (appointed party).

1. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion (Appointed Party) made a full repayment of the loan to the Defendant (Appointed Party) from September 6, 2001 to January 9, 2006. However, the Defendant (Appointed Party) received pressure from the Defendant F on the ground that, upon receiving a payment order from June 1, 2004, Defendant (Appointed Party) filed a request for auction of F’s real estate on the basis of such order, and received KRW 14,00,000 from the Appointed Party F on January 9, 2006.

Defendant C has instigated the above actions of the Defendant (Appointed Party) and also the Appointed D and E.

The designated parties F spent 12,00,000 won for trial costs over several years by Defendant D, E, and Defendant C, and 10,000 won for incidental expenses, and 2,510,000 won for cancellation of real estate registration.

Defendant C threatened F in the course of the relevant litigation, and committed a tort such as fraud and fabrication of private documents in the suspension of compulsory execution.

In addition, Defendant C applied for payment order from the Busan District Court No. 201 tea 2992 and 201 tea 3025 against Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and Appointed F, thereby causing damage to Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

Defendant (Appointed Party), Appointed Party D, and Defendant C sold real estate G by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) through a false auction.

The appointed party E has opened a bank passbook to the defendant (appointed party) to commit the illegal act.

Therefore, Defendant (Appointed Party), Do, E, and Defendant C should jointly and severally pay KRW 99,00,000 to the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and KRW 38,510,000 to the Appointed Party F.

2. In full view of the purport of the argument in the statement No. 1-1 to No. 4 of the evidence No. 1-4, the following purport is that even if the obligation and obligation between the Plaintiff (Appointed Party) and the Defendant (Appointed Party) have been fully liquidated, Defendant (Appointed Party) received KRW 14,00,000 from the Appointed Party F is unjust enrichment and thus, it should be returned.