The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

the purport and purpose of the claim;

1. The plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff and Defendant B are those who were in internal relations from around 2009 to around 2017.

Defendant B: (a) around May 2010, the Plaintiff entered the account of Defendant C, stating that “The Plaintiff cannot make a registration under his name due to bad credit standing, and thus, he would lend his wife’s name to the Defendant C to buy the house.”

Accordingly, the Plaintiff transferred the sum of KRW 62,895,000 to Defendant C’s account (hereinafter “the instant money”).

B. Since August 1, 2010, the Plaintiff and Defendant B purchased buildings of approximately 146 square meters and above ground (hereinafter “instant real estate”) from Jin-gu, Busan from Jin-gu, Busan, for KRW 170 million, and entered into an agreement with the trust to register the transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendant C, and completed the registration of the transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendant C on August 31, 2010.

In consultation on July 18, 2013, the Plaintiff and Defendant B sold the instant real estate in KRW 220 million.

(c)

The Defendants agreed to pay the remainder of KRW 75 million to the Plaintiff out of the proceeds from the disposal of the instant real estate at the time of selling the instant real estate. As such, the Defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff KRW 60 million as part of the agreed amount of KRW 75 million.

(d)

Despite the fact that the real right holder of the real estate of this case is the plaintiff, the defendants deceiving the plaintiff to sell the real estate of this case by deception that the above real estate was registered in the name of defendant C, and thereby acquired the proceeds of disposal, it constitutes a tort.

The acts of the defendants do not result in tort.

Even if the Defendants received the instant money from the Plaintiff without any legal ground, they obtained pecuniary benefits equivalent to the said amount, thereby causing damages equivalent to the said amount to the Plaintiff.

Therefore, the Defendants jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 60 million due to tort damages or the return of unjust enrichment.