1. The plaintiffs' appeal and the plaintiff Eul's conjunctive claim against the defendant Eul added in the trial are all dismissed.

2...

1. Basic facts are based on this part: ① to the third to the first to the third to the 11st of the judgment of the first instance; ② The result of the tax investigation conducted by the second to the sixth to the sixth 10th of the judgment of the first instance; ② E paid corporate tax of KRW 149,892,931, and value-added tax of KRW 733,785,958, including additional tax. ② From 2009 to 2012, E omitted cash amount of KRW 4.636,857,500 for four years from 2009 to 2012; ② the said money was disposed of as bonus to the Plaintiff B; ③ the Plaintiff paid KRW 1.61,324,000, such as personal income tax, etc.; ③ the portion of the judgment of the first instance except for adding the evidence No. 20 to the evidence No. A222, the basis for recognition is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of paragraph (1) of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the plaintiffs' primary claims

A. The Plaintiffs (1) Plaintiffs (1) from May 2008 to December 2012, 2012 to KRW 1,359,142,210 in total to the Defendants (hereinafter “instant money”).

(2) The Defendants purchased the right to sell the instant apartment in the name of the Defendants in accordance with the title trust agreement concluded with the Defendants, and completed the registration of ownership transfer. Therefore, the Defendants should be deemed as unjust enrichment of KRW 635,40,00 of the purchase price of the Plaintiff’s share, and if the title trust agreement is not recognized, the Plaintiffs should be deemed to have lent the said money to the Defendants. Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to pay the Defendants a total of KRW 1,905,825,510 [the sum of KRW 1,270,425,510 [the sum of KRW 1,359,210 – KRW 88,716,700] or a loan of KRW 635,540,00,000,000,000,000,0000,000 won, and damages for delay thereafter.