1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On January 26, 2016, the fact that the Defendant, based on the executory exemplification of the judgment stated in the purport of the claim, executed the attachment execution (hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”) on the attached list of Pyeongtaek-si apartment Nos. 105-dong No. 607 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) (hereinafter “instant apartment”) as the Defendant’s obligor based on the executory exemplification of the judgment stated in the purport of the claim by the Defendant as the obligor, and as the obligor, on January 26, 2016, does not conflict between the parties.

2. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion was as follows: (a) with C, the Plaintiff concluded an agreement with C on the premise that the ownership of the instant apartment and the instant apartment and the instant goods shall be transferred in return for the subrogation of the obligor C, the mortgagee of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant agreement”) and the 60 million won out of the secured debt, which caused 169 million won of the maximum debt amount, due to the obligor C, the mortgagee of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “mortgage”).

According to the above agreement, after completing provisional registration with respect to the apartment of this case in the name of the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff subrogated for the amount of KRW 30 million on December 10, 2015, and KRW 30 million on January 15, 2016, respectively. On January 18, 2016, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the apartment of this case in the name of the Plaintiff on January 18, 2016. Since the instant goods are owned by the Plaintiff, the instant goods are owned by the Plaintiff, which was given payment in kind by C in accordance with the agreement of this case.

3. The determination is based on the following circumstances, although the Plaintiff, issued by a financial institution, subrogated for the obligation of KRW 60,000,000,000 for C’s loan obligations, the ownership of the instant apartment and the instant apartment and the instant goods by December 31, 2015, in the agreement (Evidence A9), which is a disposal document (Evidence A) submitted by the Plaintiff as evidence of the instant agreement, is either a dispute between the parties or a comprehensive purport of the entire pleadings, i.e., a disposal document submitted by the Plaintiff as evidence of the instant agreement (Evidence A).