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

A. (1) A transferred the ownership of each of the instant real estates (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”) as to each of the instant real estates listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estates”, and refers individually to the sequence), the Suwon District Court Yangyang District Court issued a registration of transfer of ownership on July 25, 200 as the receipt No. 17870 on July 21, 2000.

(2) Thereafter, on August 13, 2012, A filed a transfer of ownership (hereinafter “instant transfer of ownership”) with respect to each of the instant real estate with No. 35189, which was received on August 13, 2012 by the same registry office, from B on August 9, 2012.

B. The Defendant’s provisional disposition and compulsory execution (1) regarding each of the instant real estate, the Defendant filed an application for provisional disposition with the Seoul Central District Court 2012Kadan53448 to prohibit disposal on November 22, 2012 by claiming the right to claim the cancellation of ownership transfer registration based on the right to revoke the obligee’s right to revoke the ownership transfer registration, and the provisional disposition was revoked on the same day.

(2) The Defendant sought reimbursement from the Seoul Central District Court 2013Gahap504647, and filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of fraudulent act and restitution to the original state against the sales contract between A and B with respect to each of the instant real estate. On March 28, 2014, “Defendant C and A jointly and severally (the Defendant in this case) shall pay to the Plaintiff (the Defendant in this case) 727,025,091 won and 727,02,758 won each year from December 13, 2012 to July 12, 2013, and 12% each year from the next day to the date of full payment, and shall be paid the interest calculated at the rate of 20% each year from the next day to the date of full payment, and with respect to the instant real estate, the sales contract concluded on August 9, 2012 between Defendant B and Defendant A was revoked, and with respect to the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration procedure of the Plaintiff in this case.”

(3) The part of the claim for revocation of fraudulent act and restoration to original state with respect to the third real estate in this case was dismissed).