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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

A. The Plaintiff filed an application with the Seoul Western District Court for the payment order against B as Seoul Western District Court 201 tea7921. On May 6, 2011, the said court ordered B to pay the Plaintiff KRW 29,622,538 and its delay damages jointly and severally with the Viter et al., which was a stock company, but jointly and severally with the Plaintiff. The said payment order was finalized as it is.

B. On February 18, 2013, C, the partner of B, died on February 18, 2013, and there was D, B, the wife of the deceased C, and the Defendant, D, and B, on March 21, 2013, entered the division agreement that the Defendant unilaterally succeeds to the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the network C (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence 1, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The division agreement of this case concluded by the Plaintiff’s assertion B on the waiver of the inheritance shares (2/7) with respect to the real estate of this case, which is the only property between the Defendant and the Defendant, in excess of the debt, constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, which constitutes a creditor, and thus, the above division agreement shall be revoked as to B’s inheritance shares 2/7. The Defendant is obligated to restore B to its original state, and the registration procedure for cancellation of transfer of ownership is completed as stated in the purport of the claim regarding B’s inheritance shares.

3. Determination

A. As a result, a debtor in excess of his/her obligation waives his/her right to inherited property in consultation on division of the inherited property, which led to a decrease in the joint security for general creditors.

Even if the result of the division of property is less than the amount corresponding to the debtor's specific share of inheritance, it shall not be revoked as a fraudulent act, and even if it is less than the amount corresponding to the specific share of inheritance, the scope of revocation as a fraudulent act is less than the extent.