A. The Plaintiff is a creditor who has a national tax claim of KRW 171,716,600, as shown in the attached Table 2, against D as to the debtor D.

B. E owned 104.28/324 shares (=869/2,70 shares) among the real estate listed in paragraph 4 of the attached list Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 5 and real estate listed in paragraph 4 of the same list.

C. E died on May 11, 2016, and his heir D and the Defendants are children.

D and the Defendants, on June 8, 2016, entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property with the content that each real estate listed in Section 1, Section 2, Section 3, and Section 5 of Attached Table 1 among the instant real estate shall be owned by Defendant A, and that each real estate listed in Section 4 of the same Schedule shall be owned by Defendant B and each of Defendant C, and the respective shares of 290/2700 square meters in Gwangju Northern-gu, 308.9 square meters listed in Section 4 of the same Schedule shall be owned by Defendant B and A. D shall be owned by Defendant C and the respective shares of 289.5/2700.

The same year as agreed above.

7. On May 11, 2016, each registration of ownership transfer was completed on the grounds of "the inheritance by consultation and division".

E. As of June 8, 2016, D’s active property was 1/50 shares among G condominiums in Gyeonggi-gu, Gyeonggi-do, and the value was 812,844 won.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 1, witness D's testimony, the purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts stated in Paragraph (1) of the revocation of a fraudulent act, as the debtor D entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property with the Defendants on June 8, 2016 on the condition that it does not fully inherit the deceased E’s inherited property, and deepens the financial condition of the Plaintiff et al., so the agreement on the division of inherited property constitutes a fraudulent act, and D knew that the said agreement constitutes a fraudulent act, and that the said agreement deepens the financial condition of the deceased et al. at the time of the said agreement. Meanwhile, as long as the said agreement objectively constitutes a fraudulent act, it is presumed that the Defendants, a beneficiary of the said sales agreement, will be aware of

The Defendants, D, October 12, 201, are E.