1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows: (a) the court shall dismiss “ September 21, 2012” in Part 2, Chapter 16, of the judgment of the court of first instance as “ October 21, 2012”; and (b) except for adding the following judgments, it is identical to the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance; and (c) thus, it shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The summary of the Defendants’ assertion is that: (a) KRW 70 million entered in the loan certificate dated August 3, 2010 is not leased to the Defendants; (b) the Plaintiff purchased, under title trust with Defendant C, a high-gun D & 309 square meters and a single-story house on the ground (hereinafter “instant house”) in Gangwon-do on August 3, 2010, and paid the purchase price.

The Defendants leased the instant housing from the Plaintiff to 560,000 won per month for five years.

However, at the Plaintiff’s request, the loan certificate of August 3, 2010 against KRW 70 million was prepared and issued and stated 0.8% interest equivalent to KRW 560,000 for the above monthly rent.

Accordingly, the Defendants paid to the Plaintiff the monthly rent for the instant housing, and used the instant housing. From October 2012, the Defendants did not use the instant housing any longer from October 201.

Therefore, the Defendants have no obligation to pay the principal and interest on the above loans of KRW 70 million and monthly rent on the instant housing since October 2012. Therefore, the Defendants cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s request made under the pretext of interest for the said monthly rent of KRW 70 million.

B. The judgment real estate registration is presumed to have been completed by legitimate grounds for registration from the fact that it exists formally, and the person who asserts that he/she had registered the title in trust to another person shall be liable to prove the relevant title trust fact.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da84479, Oct. 29, 2015). In full view of the entries in the evidence Nos. 1-1 and No. 2-1 and the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff is against the Defendants.