1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On August 11, 2008, C entered into a sales contract with the Defendant with respect to D (hereinafter “instant fishing vessel”) and the instant fishing vessel-related coastal complex fishery permit (hereinafter “instant fishery permit”) with a sales amount of KRW 48 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).

B. In order to enhance the competitiveness of coastal fisheries, the 2015 coastal fishing vessel reduction project was carried out, and the Defendant applied for the cancellation of the registration of the instant fishing vessel and the abolition of the instant fishery permit.

C. On November 4, 2015, Boan City decided to pay to the Defendant KRW 16,057,00 as a purchase subsidy for the instant fishing vessel, and KRW 35,00 as a business closure subsidy. On December 2015, Boan City decided to pay the Defendant the above application KRW 51,124,000 = KRW 16,057,000 = KRW 35,067,000: hereinafter “the instant subsidy”).

(B) paid. [The facts that there is no dispute over the basis for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, Eul evidence No. 2, the purport of the whole pleadings, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. Determination

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was the actual owner of the instant fishing vessel, and the Plaintiff, a child of E who was in a de facto marital relationship with the Plaintiff, and had a title trust again made a title trust to the Defendant in the form of a sales contract upon termination of the said de facto marital relationship.

Therefore, since the Defendant’s instant subsidy received from the Yan-gu viewing is deemed to be the Plaintiff’s ownership, the Defendant is obligated to return to the Plaintiff the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 30 million calculated by deducting the Plaintiff’s loan liability of KRW 13 million and the Plaintiff’s loan liability of KRW 8 million from the instant subsidy received from the Yan-gu viewing.

B. According to the reasoning of the judgment Nos. 5 and 9, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with F on December 2, 2007 with respect to the instant fishing vessel for KRW 19 million, and the Plaintiff’s fishing vessel.