1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with C, and B jointly and severally guaranteed the liability for indemnity to be borne by C according to the said credit guarantee agreement.

C obtained a loan of 52 million won from a new bank as security on June 18, 199, but there was a credit guarantee accident that damages the benefit due to overdue interest, etc.

B. On October 24, 200, the Plaintiff subrogated to the new bank for KRW 53,730,542 as the principal and interest of C.

As of January 19, 2017, the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity against C and B is KRW 161,794,281.

C. Article 101, 1401, Dong 1401 (hereinafter “instant building”) of the Gyeyang-gu Incheon Building (hereinafter “instant building”) was owned by the erode Banbppyppum Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “non-party company”). On January 21, 201, the purchase and sale was based on the grounds for registration, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future of the Defendant on May 27, 2013.

[Grounds for recognition] The descriptions of evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Assertion and determination

A. The Plaintiff’s primary claim B, who was his own child, concluded a title trust agreement with the Defendant, and the Defendant, the title trustee, concluded a sales contract on the instant building with the Nonparty Company, and completed the registration of ownership transfer by paying the price.

However, according to the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name, the non-party company, the seller, was unaware of the existence of the title trust agreement, and thus, even though the title trust agreement between B and the defendant was invalidated, the defendant, the title trustee

As a result, the defendant had made unjust enrichment equivalent to the purchase fund that he provided in relation to the title truster B. B had a claim for return of unjust enrichment equivalent to KRW 90 million for the purchase fund remaining after subtracting the amount of KRW 210 million from the financial institution in the name of the defendant among KRW 300 million for the purchase price of the building of this case from the amount of KRW 300 million for the defendant.

B There is no particular property.