A. A. On April 6, 2016, AB Savings Bank loaned KRW 11,00,000 to B by setting the lending period of KRW 36 months and interest rate of KRW 27.9% per annum. On March 27, 2017, the Savings Bank transferred the above lending claim against B to the Plaintiff.

The Plaintiff filed an application against B for the payment order with Seoul Northern District Court 2017 tea29489, and the said court on June 28, 2017 ordered “B shall pay to the Plaintiff 12,262,432 won and 10,131,920 won among them at the rate of 27.9% per annum from June 6, 2017 to the date of complete payment,” and the said order was finalized on August 25, 2017.

B. On May 20, 2016, the registration for transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendant was completed on May 3, 2016 on the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by B (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

C. At the time of May 3, 2016, the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage on the instant real estate was completed, which was 218,40,000, with respect to the establishment of a mortgage-backed property (right to collateral security, etc.).

(hereinafter “The instant mortgage”). On May 20, 2016, the Defendant’s registration of the establishment of the instant real estate was cancelled on the grounds of termination on May 20, 2016, when the registration of the establishment of the instant mortgage was completed.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, and 5 (including additional statements), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The “legal act detrimental to the obligee”, which is the requirement for one obligee’s right of revocation for a fraudulent act, is an act of disposing of the obligor’s property, and thereby, it would make it impossible for the obligee to fully satisfy the obligee’s claims by means of a decrease in the obligor’s property to make it difficult for the obligor to fully satisfy the obligee’s claims due to a lack of joint security for claims or a lack of joint security already available for lack. Therefore, such fraudulent act is in excess