A sales contract concluded on December 4, 2018 with respect to the real estate stated in the list (attached Form) between the defendant and C shall be 614,356.

2. Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act:

3. Some of the dismissed parts of the Plaintiff sought a revocation of the entire sales contract of this case while seeking compensation. However, when the obligee exercises the obligee’s right of revocation, in principle, it cannot exercise the obligee’s right of revocation in excess of his/her claim amount. In this case, the obligee’s claim amount includes interest or delay damages arising from the time of the closure of pleadings in fact-finding proceedings (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da64547, Dec. 11, 2001). The Plaintiff’s claim amount, which is the scope of revocation of fraudulent act and compensation for value in this case, is the loan amount of KRW 400,000,000,000, and the damages for delay accrued for 1630 days from March 24, 2016 to September 8, 2020 as of the date of the closing of pleadings in this case (i.e., the total of KRW 400,000,000 x 1636364,1646

We cannot accept the part seeking the cancellation of the instant sales contract exceeding the above KRW 614,356,164.

On the other hand, the plaintiff claimed compensation for damages for delay calculated by the agreement rate of 400,000 won after the date of the closing of argument in this case. However, since the effect of revocation of fraudulent act becomes final and conclusive in a lawsuit seeking revocation of fraudulent act, the plaintiff cannot be held liable for delay before this judgment becomes final and conclusive, and the interest rate is in accordance with the interest rate of 5% as stipulated in the Civil Act. Thus, the part seeking compensation for damages for delay exceeding the statutory interest rate after this judgment becomes final and conclusive shall not be accepted.