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

A. On March 30, 2007, the Defendant entered into a real estate security trust agreement (hereinafter “instant trust agreement”) with Nonparty Co., Ltd. on each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “Nonindicted Co., Ltd.”) on March 30, 2007, and on the same day, the ownership transfer registration based on the instant trust agreement was made in the future of the Defendant regarding each of the instant land. (B) The Plaintiff filed against Nonparty Co., Ltd. an application for the payment order to seek payment of KRW 321 million for the unpaid construction design cost with Hongsung Branch Branch of Daejeon District Court Decision 2008Ka249, and on April 21, 2008, the Plaintiff issued the payment order with the effect that “the non-party Co., Ltd. shall pay the Plaintiff the unpaid design cost of KRW 321 million and the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 200 million per annum from the day after the original copy was served to the day of complete payment.”

C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff filed a provisional injunction against the Defendant on July 15, 2009 with the Daejeon District Court Decision 2009Kadan3990 (hereinafter referred to as the "provisional injunction against the disposal of real estate in each of the instant lands") on the grounds that the Defendant’s claim against restitution based on the revocation of fraudulent act as the preserved right to the claim against the Defendant for provisional injunction against the disposal of real estate in each of the instant lands.

(B) On July 16, 2009, the above provisional disposition period registration was completed. [The facts that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3-1, 2, and 4-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. The plaintiff's assertion was awarded a contract for the design service of apartment units to be newly constructed in a single unit of land 548 Hong-gun Hongsung-gun, Hongsung-gun, Hongsung-gun, Hongsung-gun, and thus was not paid KRW 321 million out of the service cost.

Although the non-party company was liable to the Plaintiff for the payment of the unpaid service charges, this case’s land, which is the only property between the defendant and the non-party company on March 30, 2007, for the purpose of evading obligations.