On February 15, 2016, it was concluded on February 15, 2016 with regard to 1/5 shares of the real estate listed in attached Table 1 list between Defendant A and C.

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D (hereinafter “D”) and C as the Daejeon District Court Decision 2015Kadan219129, Daejeon District Court. On November 24, 2015, the said court rendered a ruling that “The Plaintiff shall pay to the Plaintiff, and D shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 2,192,00,000,00, and KRW 1,332,014,14, and 23% per annum from June 9, 2015 to the date of full payment; and C shall jointly pay KRW 1,64,00,000,000, out of the said money, to D, and the said ruling became final and conclusive on January 6, 2016.”

B. On February 15, 2016, C entered into a sales contract with Defendant A for one-five shares of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant real estate”). On March 9, 2016, C completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the said shares to Defendant A as Seoul Central District Court Receipt No. 47367.

C On March 9, 2016, Defendant A and the instant real estate concluded a mortgage-backed establishment contract with regard to the fourth-five shares of the instant real estate, and on the same day, the Seoul Central District Court received the registration of establishment of the neighboring real estate as Seoul Central District Court No. 47368.

C. In addition, on March 14, 2016, C entered into a gift agreement with Defendant B on the share of 4/5 of the instant real estate, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 28, 2016 as Seoul Central District Court Receipt No. 59321.

However, at the time of the conclusion of the above sales contract, mortgage contract, and gift contract, C did not have any property other than the instant real estate and did not have any property.

[Grounds for recognition] Facts not clearly disputed, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. As seen earlier, C’s claim against C is subject to the obligee’s right of revocation, since C’s claim against C is equal to KRW 1,644,00,000,000.

B. It is easy for a debtor to sell and consume real estate in excess of his/her obligation and change it into money that can be easily consumed.