A. On September 5, 2017, the Plaintiff’s claim against C was ordered to pay the Plaintiff KRW 10,196,269 as Incheon District Court Decision 2017Hu23560, Sept. 5, 2017, and the payment order was finalized on October 11, 2017.

B. On March 25, 2016, D, the father of the Defendant and C division C’s inheritance consultation division, died on March 25, 2016, and the heir is the Defendant, children, E, C, and F, the spouse.

The Defendant, E, C, and F made a division of inherited property agreement (hereinafter “instant division”) with the purport that their children will not inherit the real estate indicated in the separate sheet owned by D and the Defendant would own the real estate solely (hereinafter “instant division”). Accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer under the Defendant’s name was made on June 15, 2016 with the same Government District Court Dongbcheon Registry as the receipt of No. 8927 on June 15, 2016.

C. C was insolvent at the time of the instant consultation and division.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. As seen earlier prior to the establishment of the preserved claim, the Plaintiff’s claim against C had existed prior to the instant agreement division, which becomes the preserved claim in the obligee’s right of revocation.

B. As a matter of principle, a fraudulent act committed against a creditor by an obligor in excess of his/her obligation, even if the joint collateral against a general creditor has decreased due to the waiver of his/her right to the inherited property upon the split-off agreement of inherited property.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da29119, Jul. 26, 2007). Meanwhile, a debtor’s act of transferring real estate, which is one of his/her sole property, to another person without compensation, constitutes a fraudulent act against a creditor, barring any special circumstance, and thus, an obligor’s intent of deception is presumed and transferred.