It is necessary to prove the debtor's insolvency as a requirement for a creditor's subrogation lawsuit.

In this case where there is no evidence to acknowledge insolvent, the plaintiff cannot be recognized as having the right to claim the transfer of ownership based on the termination of title trust, the sale and purchase, or the restoration of real name in subrogation of Lee○○ in order to preserve the above tax claim. Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful.

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. (a) Of the real estate listed in attached Table 1. (a)

(1) As to the 1/10 shares, the Defendant Yang-○, ○○, implements the procedure for ownership transfer registration on the ground of termination of title trust to this○○;

(2) As to the 9/10 shares, Defendant Yang-○ shall implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration based on the cause of the restoration of real name to Defendant Lee ○○○.

B. Defendant Lee ○-○ shall implement the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer for sale on May 20, 2004 with respect to the real estate listed in the attached list A. A. as to the real estate listed in the attached list.

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff has a total of KRW 757,868,410 against Nonparty ○○○.

B. ○○○ purchased each real estate listed in the separate sheet as listed below from all owners, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the above Defendants with respect to each of the above real estate under title trust to Defendant Yang○○○, Defendant Yang ○○, Defendant Yang ○, Defendant Lee ○○, and Defendant Lee ○○, who is the wife, and his children.

C. Since the above title trust agreement between Lee○-○ and the Defendant Yang○-○, Lee○-○, Lee○-○, Lee○-○, Lee○-○, and Lee○-○, all of the above title trust agreements are null and void, the above ownership transfer registration completed in the name of the

D. Therefore, in order to preserve the above taxation claim against ○○○, the Plaintiff sought implementation of the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the cancellation of the above title trust to the Defendant Yang○○, who is the wife on behalf of this ○○○, and the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the above sale to preserve the right to claim the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the above sale on the Defendant Lee○○, ○○, Y○, and New ○○, by subrogation of this title trust. In order to preserve the right to claim the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of this sale on the part of this ○○○, Defendant Lee○, ○○, ○○, and ○○, and the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the said sale on behalf of this ○○○, Defendant Lee○, and ○○, and

2. Whether the lawsuit of this case is lawful

A. In case where the obligee’s right to the obligor to be preserved by subrogation is a monetary claim in the event that the obligee’s right to the obligor is a monetary claim in subrogation of the obligor, the obligee may exercise the obligee’s right to the third obligor by subrogation of the obligor only when the obligor is insolvent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 93Da28867, Oct. 8, 1993). If the preservation is not necessary, the obligee’s subrogation lawsuit is unlawful and dismissed.

B. Therefore, it is only recognized that ○○○, a debtor, has net assets worth at least KRW 314,463,840, even if considering the above tax liability of the Plaintiff, in light of the following: (a) there is no evidence to acknowledge that ○○○ is insolvent; and (b) rather, in light of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement in No. 3, No. 3, and (c) the purport of the entire pleadings.

C. In this case where there is no evidence to acknowledge the insolvency of ○○○○ as above, the Plaintiff’s exercise of each right to claim the transfer of ownership based on the termination of title trust, sale or real name recovery against the Defendants by subrogation of ○○○ in order to preserve the above taxation claim against ○○○. Thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, we decide to dismiss the instant lawsuit and decide as per Disposition.