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

Therefore, the monetary claim against the plaintiff C reaches 72 million won in total.

C A. On January 14, 2011, with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as the only property between the Defendant and the Defendant (hereinafter “instant real estate”) in excess of the debt, C entered into a donation contract (hereinafter “instant donation contract”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant on January 21, 201.

As the gift contract of this case constitutes a fraudulent act, the cancellation of the gift contract of this case and the claim for compensation for value, preliminary cancellation of the gift contract of this case, and subsequent restitution of the ownership transfer registration of this case is sought.

2. A lawsuit seeking revocation of a fraudulent act’s determination on the Defendant’s principal defense is instituted within one year from the date the obligee becomes aware of the existence of a fraudulent act, and within five years from the date of the occurrence of a legal act (Article 406(2) of the Civil Act). It is evident that the lawsuit in this case was brought on March 30, 201, which was five years after January 14, 201, the date of the instant donation contract, which was the date of the Plaintiff’s assertion that it was a fraudulent act.

Therefore, the instant lawsuit is unlawful since it was filed with the lapse of the period of filing a lawsuit for revocation of fraudulent act under Article 406(2) of the Civil Act.

3. Conclusion, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and dismissed.