Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

In the judgment of the court of first instance, "the defendant and C." in paragraph (1).

A. On February 23, 2018, the Plaintiff: (a) determined the interest rate of KRW 23 million per annum 17.1% per annum; (b) 24.1% per annum per annum; and (c) during the 60-month period, on the 20th day of each month by equal repayment of the principal and interest.

B. D is the spouse of C, I is the father of C, and the defendant is the husband of I.

C. On October 28, 2016, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on September 17, 2016 with respect to the entire real estate (hereinafter “instant apartment”) recorded in the separate sheet on September 28, 2016, based on the sale on September 17, 2016, and the shares of C(J) and D were 1/2, respectively.

On January 8, 2019, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer (hereinafter “the instant registration of ownership transfer”) on January 2, 2019 with respect to the real estate stated in the attached Form (hereinafter “instant apartment ownership ownership”) on January 2, 2019 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) as the receipt No. 2082 on January 8, 2019 by the Suwon District Court, Dongwon District Court, Dongwon registry office (hereinafter “instant apartment ownership transfer”).

E. From February 20, 2019, C delayed the repayment of the loan to the Plaintiff.

F. C filed an application for individual rehabilitation on February 25, 2019.

(U) The fact that there is no dispute over the Seoul District Court 2019 Session10362. [Grounds for recognition], Gap evidence 1 through Gap evidence 7, Eul evidence 37, and the whole purport of pleadings.

2. Determination:

A. (1) According to the above facts, at the time of the conclusion of the instant sales contract, the Plaintiff had a claim such as a loan of KRW 23 million with respect to C, and an agreed interest thereon.

This is a preserved claim of creditor's right of revocation.

(2) Whether a fraudulent act is established (A) or not the shares of the apartment in this case are the property of C’s liability or the defendant purchased the apartment in this case with its own funds and held the title trust of 1/2 of them in tax issues C. Since the shares of the apartment in this case do not constitute the property of liability of C, it does not constitute a fraudulent act even if the ownership is transferred to the defendant.