1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 201, 201, the Plaintiff started to immediately teach Defendant B through the marriage broker, and immediately started to teach the Plaintiff. Although they temporarily hedginged, they continue to maintain a friendly relationship by living together with others for a considerable period of time, and completed the marriage report on June 21, 2013.

B. On May 23, 201, the Plaintiff delivered KRW 30 million to each of the Defendant B, and KRW 3 million around November 201, 201. On January 13, 2012, Defendant B prepared and issued a loan certificate stating that “When the instant real estate was sold to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff will repay the instant real estate at the latest until April 10, 2012.” (hereinafter “the instant loan certificate”).

C. On October 6, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Defendant B seeking divorce and payment of consolation money of KRW 30 million with the Suwon District Court KRW 2015ddan3026 (hereinafter “related divorce case”). On November 25, 2015 in the relevant divorce case, the conciliation was concluded that “the Plaintiff and Defendant B shall be divorced, but the Plaintiff and Defendant B shall not file a monetary claim against the other party under any pretext, such as consolation money and division of property, in relation to the divorce of this case.”

On September 8, 2015, Defendant B entered into the instant gift agreement with Defendant C, a pro-friendly person with respect to the instant real estate, and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in its name with Defendant C as the head of Chuncheon District Court on September 10, 2015, which was received on September 10, 2015.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, Eul evidence No. 1 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to Defendant B’s main defense

A. The part of the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B against Defendant B is unlawful, as it is contrary to the subordinate claim agreement entered in the mediation protocol of the relevant divorce case, and thus, is unlawful.

B. The plaintiff and the defendant B are future in the case of divorce between the plaintiff and the defendant B.