1. The Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) paid KRW 430,00,000 to the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and its related amount from June 1, 2014 to August 13, 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 24, 2007, the Plaintiff started to have an internal relationship with the Defendant having a legal wife.

B. During the period of Ansan-si around November 20, 2009, the Defendant leased Nos. 101, 302, and caused the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff to live in the said apartment. The Defendant also accommodated in the said apartment.

C. On January 201, the Plaintiff proposed to the Defendant the purchase of the said D Apartment No. 103, 403 (hereinafter “instant apartment”) (hereinafter “instant apartment”), and the Defendant consented thereto.

On January 11, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into a sales contract with E to purchase the instant apartment in KRW 410 million (Evidence A 12). The Defendant gave the Plaintiff the funds and taxes necessary for the purchase of the said apartment.

On February 25, 2011, the Plaintiff drafted a cash storage certificate (Evidence B 3) stating that “The Plaintiff borrowed KRW 430 million as the purchase price of the instant apartment, and then sold at a price of at least KRW 550 million in the future, and shall pay 40% of the principal and the difference as interest.”

On March 16, 2011, the Plaintiff paid a sale remainder to the seller, and completed the registration of ownership transfer concerning the apartment of this case.

The plaintiff resided in the apartment of this case with children around that time, and the defendant was lodging in the above apartment of this case.

E. On December 1, 2013, the Defendant discontinued contact with the Plaintiff in the instant apartment, and thereby, the relationship between the original Defendant and the Defendant was terminated.

F. On December 17, 2013, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff, respectively, a content-certified mail (Evidence A 4-2) stating that “The instant apartment is prohibited from unilateral trade, etc. since it was nominal trust to the Defendant,” and that “the Defendant borrowed KRW 430 million from February 25, 201 to May 31, 201,” respectively, to the effect that “the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a content-certified mail (Evidence A 4-2) stating that “the instant apartment is prohibited from unilateral trade, etc. as it was trusted to the Defendant.”

G. The Plaintiff’s February 27, 2014 and the same year

5.9. The apartment of the instant case is provided as security to the Korea Cze Bank.