2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 160,000,000 won with 5% interest per annum from the day following the day when the judgment of this case is finalized to the day of complete payment.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

A. The plaintiff's assertion

B. Defendant’s assertion

As of July 31, 2008, the above Kims assumed the obligation of KRW 150,000,000 due to the transactional relation to the non-party Usa to the non-party Usa. However, the defendant, who was shots, lent KRW 160,00,000 to the above Kims on July 31, 2008, made it possible for him to repay the obligation of KRW 150,000,000 to Usa and used the remainder of KRW 10,000 for the cost of living.

Therefore, on March 3, 2016, the Defendant received KRW 160,000,00 from the above Kim Ss as the repayment of the above loan, and the Defendant is a bona fide beneficiary.

2. Determination

(a) Formation and insolvency of the preserved claim;

According to the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including additional numbers), the above Kims paid the above money to the defendant by issuing the 160,000,000 won check, which was already established as of March 3, 2016, and accordingly, the basic legal relationship on the creation of the instant tax claim was established as of March 3, 2016, and accordingly, the tax claim of this case was created between June 31, 2016 and March 2018.

Therefore, the taxation claim of this case constitutes the preserved claim that can seek the revocation of the above Kims' donation against the defendant.

In addition, according to the evidence No. 8 and evidence No. 12, the above Kims at the time of March 3, 2016 can be seen that there was an insolvent status.

B. Whether the fraudulent act was established

On the other hand, it is presumed that the above Kims paid the above money to the defendant on March 3, 2016, causing the lack of joint security to the creditors of the above Kims including the plaintiff, and the defendant who received the above money from the above Kims recognized that the lack of joint security would have resulted in the shortage of joint security.

In addition, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the above Uaa has a claim for transaction against the above Kims solely on the basis of each statement in the evidence Nos. 1 and 11 (including the paper numbers) submitted by the defendant, and that the defendant lent money of KRW 160,000 to the above Kims for the repayment of the above Uaa's claim, etc. Therefore, it is difficult to recognize the fact that the defendant had acted in good faith at the time of receiving KRW 160,00,000 from the above Kims.

Therefore, the defendant's assertion is not accepted.

C. Sub-committee

Therefore, the contract of donation concluded on March 3, 2016 between the above Kimss and the defendant shall be revoked, and the defendant shall be obligated to pay to the plaintiff 160 million won with 5% interest per annum from the day following the day when the judgment of this case is finalized to the day of complete payment.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim shall be accepted for the reasons and it is so decided as per Disposition.