1. The plaintiff's main claim against the defendant B shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's ancillary disposition against the defendant B.

Based on the facts, the plaintiff lent money to D with the debt guarantee of D and E, and filed a lawsuit against D and E for a loan claim with the Daegu District Court 2014da13515.

On October 29, 2014, conciliation was concluded with the purport that “D and E shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated by the ratio of KRW 80 million to KRW 1.6 million per month from November 25, 2013 to the date of full payment.”

In addition, D was sentenced to one year of imprisonment with prison labor on December 11, 2014 for the crime that acquired a sum of KRW 130 million, including KRW 30 million on February 29, 2012, and KRW 100 million on July 11, 2012 from the Plaintiff in relation to the above loans in Changwon District Court 2014Kadan310 on December 11, 2014. The above judgment was dismissed, and the appeal was withdrawn, and it became final and conclusive upon withdrawal of the appeal.

Attached Form

With respect to the real estate indicated in the list (hereinafter “instant real estate”), a sales contract between Defendant B and Defendant C, the mother of D, concluded on July 30, 2012 between the seller and Defendant C with the amount of KRW 1865 million for Defendant B and the purchaser (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). Accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer (hereinafter “instant transfer registration”) was completed in Defendant C from the Daegu District Court as of September 5, 2012 under the title of Article 115431 of the Seo-gu District Court’s receipt of the Seo-gu Branch branch branch branch branch branch branch support, and Defendant C completed the ownership transfer registration (hereinafter “instant transfer”).

[Ground of recognition] The facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 (hereinafter referred to as "numbering parties"), and the plaintiff's assertion that the purport of the whole pleadings is as to the plaintiff's assertion D is to purchase the real estate of this case from defendant C and trust the title of the registration to the defendant B. Thus, the transfer of ownership of this case is based on the so-called three-party registered title trust, and is null and void in accordance with Article 4 of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual Titleholder's Name (hereinafter referred

Therefore, the defendant B, who is the title trustee, is the seller, the defendant C.