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

On June 19, 2011, the Plaintiff lent KRW 450 million to C.

However, C did not repay the above loan debt to the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff applied for a payment order claiming the return of loan from the Jung-gu District Court High Court 201j5132, Nov. 10, 201, upon receiving a payment order from the above court, “C shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 45 million with interest rate of 24% per annum from July 1, 2011 to November 18, 201, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.” The above payment order was finalized on December 2, 2011.

The Defendant filed a divorce and a claim for division of property against C with the U.S. High Government District Court 201ddan970, and the Defendant and C divorced in the above lawsuit, and C entered in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real property”) to the Defendant on February 14, 2012, the conciliation was concluded that the procedure for transfer of ownership due to division of property was implemented on February 14, 2012.

(A) On April 27, 2012, the instant real estate was transferred to another person under the name of the Defendant on April 27, 2012, with respect to the instant real estate as a result of the conciliation.

【Ground of recognition” without any dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 4-1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 3-1, 3-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.

The plaintiff asserts that the division of property in this case constitutes a fraudulent act, while the defendant asserts that the division of property in this case does not constitute a fraudulent act as the payment of proper division of property according to divorce.

Judgment

In divorce, division of property is to contribute to the maintenance of the other party's living at the same time as the other party's property is liquidated and distributed after the liquidation of the real common property which the married couple had in the marriage, but it is divorced by the act of division.