The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. The lower court, citing the judgment of the first instance, determined that the transfer of claims against A, B, etc. to the Defendant only among multiple creditors, constitutes a fraudulent act subject to the obligee’s right of revocation.

Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on fraudulent act, contrary to what is alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. Based on its stated reasoning, the lower court determined that there was insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant was bona fide at the time of receiving the assignment of each of the instant claims, and that there was no other evidence to acknowledge

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the beneficiary’s intention to commit suicide, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

3. The court below rejected the defendant's assertion that the judgment of the first instance ordering the defendant to compensate for value against the principle of equality of creditors.

Examining the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine on compensation for value, as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

4. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.