1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. On November 7, 2012, the Plaintiff spent 12,700,000 won for the registration of ownership transfer with respect to C Apartment 104, 303, Dobong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (hereinafter “instant apartment”) on behalf of the Defendant.

B. On December 10, 2013, the Plaintiff paid KRW 21,088,571 to the Defendant on behalf of the Defendant for additional inheritance tax on the property inherited from the network D.

C. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to return the Plaintiff a sum of KRW 33,788,571 (= KRW 12,700,000) to the Plaintiff in unjust enrichment.

2. Determination

A. The evidence submitted by the Plaintiff on the part of the cost of transfer registration of ownership is difficult to deem that the Plaintiff paid the above cost of transfer registration of ownership on behalf of the Defendant, and there is no other evidence

Rather, in full view of the entries in Eul evidence No. 4 and the purport of the entire pleadings, it is recognized that the defendant paid KRW 15,762,055 to the certified judicial scrivener E on November 8, 2012 as expenses for the registration of ownership transfer of the apartment of this case.

Therefore, we cannot accept this part of the plaintiff's assertion.

B. The Defendant asserts that this part of the Defendant’s obligation against the Plaintiff was settled in accordance with the agreement on July 29, 2015, and thus, I examine this.

In full view of the respective descriptions and arguments of the evidence Nos. 5 and 7, the Defendant’s debt to the Plaintiff is recognized as having been settled by the agreement between the Plaintiff and the Defendant on July 29, 2015. Thus, the Defendant’s aforementioned defense is reasonable, and the Plaintiff’s assertion on this part is rejected.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is dismissed as there is no reasonable ground.