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

A. On July 23, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking reimbursement against B and E.S. Supreme Court Decision 201Da405343, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a judgment on July 23, 2012 that “B and E.S. No. 221,119,517 won jointly and severally for the Plaintiff and KRW 158,321,795 from June 30, 2011 for KRW 62,750,505 from August 18, 2011 to June 20, 2012; and that “The foregoing judgment became final and conclusive on September 1, 2012.”

B. On September 7, 2010, B entered into a contract with the Defendant to donate the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant donation contract”), and completed the registration of transfer of ownership on September 7, 2010, as the receipt No. 77390 on September 8, 2010, for the instant real estate as the receipt of the gift No. 77390 on September 8, 2010.

C. B and the Defendant shared consultations on January 28, 2011.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 3, Eul evidence 1 and 9, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The Defendant’s donation of the instant real property, the sole property of which is one of the instant real property under excess of debt B, constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the general creditors in B, and thus, the instant donation contract between B and the Defendant should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the Defendant shall pay the amount stated in the purport of the claim as compensation for value.

B. In the case of divorce 1, division of property is to liquidate and distribute the real common property of the married couple, and at the same time contribute to the maintenance of the other party’s livelihood after divorce, but it may be divided by including the nature as payment to compensate for mental damage caused by divorce by the act of the split-off.