A. The Plaintiff has a claim for indemnity amounting to KRW 500 million based on the credit guarantee agreement concluded around August 201 with respect to B (the guarantee accident occurred on April 30, 2013, and on June 26, 2013, the Plaintiff created a claim for indemnity upon the subrogation of the Plaintiff).

B On September 20, 2012 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by B (hereinafter “instant real estate”), the provisional registration of ownership transfer claim (hereinafter “provisional registration of this case”) as described in Section 2 of the Disposition was completed on March 29, 2013, after entering into a trade reservation (hereinafter “instant trade reservation”) with the Defendant on September 20, 2012, and the provisional registration of ownership transfer claim (hereinafter “instant provisional registration”).

It is true that B did not have any property other than the real estate in this case at the time of the promise to sell and purchase this case. [The ground for recognition] Nos. 1 and 2 (including a serial number), each fact inquiry conducted by the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport and the director of the New Mine Tax Office about the Minister of Land,

2. According to the above facts, it may be deemed that there was a high probability that credit guarantee agreements between the Plaintiff and B were concluded at the time of the instant promise to sell and purchase, which serve as the basis for the establishment of claims, and that there was a high probability of the occurrence of claims for indemnity based on such agreements in the near future. In fact, on April 30, 2013, a guarantee accident occurred and the Plaintiff’s subrogation was made on June 26, 2013, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity against B becomes a preserved claim for the revocation of fraudulent act.

In addition, the provisional registration of this case was completed after the debtor B entered into a pre-sale agreement with the defendant with respect to the real estate of this case, which is the only property of which the debtor, and thus, it constitutes a fraudulent act against the plaintiff, who is the creditor of this case, with the knowledge that the provisional registration of this case would cause insufficient joint security of the creditor.