2...

A. On August 19, 2014, the Plaintiff’s claim against C filed an application for payment order with the Daegu District Court Branch of 2014 tea 2425 with respect to C, and the payment order was issued on August 19, 2014. The said payment order was finalized on September 12, 2014.

The Plaintiff’s claim against C upon the above payment order is “a loan of KRW 40 million and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 20% per annum from January 1, 2013 to the date of full payment.”

B. C’s act of disposing of real estate 1) As to each real estate listed in the separate sheet, registration of preservation of ownership was completed on November 17, 2016 in the names of the Defendant, C, and D on November 17, 2016, 1/3 shares of 1/3 shares, co-ownership of C among each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

As to January 26, 2017, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed on the grounds of sale as of January 25, 2017. (2) The defendant is punished by C.

C. At the time of January 2017, the instant real estate was the only real estate owned by C.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, and 4-1, 2, 3, and Eul evidence 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The intention to commit fraudulent acts and to injure himself;

A. According to the above facts, at the time of concluding a sales contract for the instant real estate between the Defendant and C, the Plaintiff had a claim against C pursuant to a payment order, and thus, the said claim is subject to the obligee’s right of revocation.

B. Also, the instant real estate should be provided to C’s creditors, including the Plaintiff, as joint collateral, and the act of selling the instant real estate, which is the only real estate C, to the Defendant constitutes a fraudulent act against C’s general creditor.

C. It is presumed that C knew at the time of sale of the instant real estate to the Defendant that it was prejudicial to the Plaintiff, a general creditor, and that the Defendant, a beneficiary, was also aware of the aforementioned circumstances.

3. The defendant's assertion.