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

A. On October 25, 2016, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C with the Seoul Central District Court 2016Da71776, and received a favorable judgment in the court rendered a favorable judgment on October 25, 2016 that “The Defendant shall pay to the Plaintiff 31,919,451 won and 26,000,000 won among them, 12% per annum from January 1, 2016 to August 25, 2016, and 15% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.” The above judgment became final and conclusive as it is.

B. D, the father of C, died on November 6, 2016 (hereinafter “D”), and D, the heir of the deceased, had the wife, E, F, G, H, and C, the wife of the Defendant and his children.

C. On November 10, 2016, the deceased’s inheritors made an agreement on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant division agreement”) solely inherited by the Defendant on the real estate indicated in the separate sheet, which is inherited property (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”). On December 5, 2016, the ownership transfer registration in the name of the Defendant was completed regarding each of the instant real estate.

At the time of the division consultation of this case, C was in excess of the obligation.

[Based on recognition] Statement Nos. 1 through 8 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the head of Gangnam-gu Office of this Court, the result of the response of each taxation information submission order to the head of Gun, the result of the response of this Court's order to submit financial transactions to I, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. As to the share 2/13 of the Plaintiff’s assertion of each of the instant real estate, the agreement on partition of this case should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the Defendant is obligated to implement C the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the restoration of real name.

3. Determination

A. Since the Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement against C, which was established as a preserved claim, had existed prior to the instant sectional consultation, it would constitute a preserved claim in the obligee’s right of revocation.

(b) the obligor’s fraudulent act and intent to commit suicide in excess of the estimated obligation.