Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

A. On March 25, 2018, the Plaintiff lent C KRW 120,00,000 in total, and KRW 50,000,000,000 on April 16, 2018.

B. Around October 22, 2018, around October 22, 2018, C transferred to the Defendant the entire business property and goodwill of the D Week Protection Center (hereinafter “instant Center”).

(hereinafter “instant transfer contract”). C.

Around December 12, 2019, the Defendant transferred the entire business assets and goodwill of the instant center to C, while continuing the instant lawsuit.

On December 12, 2019, the defendant filed a report on the closure of business with respect to the center of this case, and C is conducting business after registering as the representative of the center of this case on December 18, 2019.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 5 and 6, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the transfer contract of this case was concluded on October 2, 2018, and around October 22, 2018, the value of active property held by C was in excess of the debt amount because it did not reach the value of the passive property, or the transfer contract of this case was in excess of the debt amount under the transfer contract of this case

Around December 12, 2019, the Defendant again transferred the name of the business operator to C with respect to the instant center. However, it is difficult to view that the instant center’s business right and business property were restored to its original state without maintaining its identity.

Therefore, the transfer contract of this case shall be cancelled within the limit of 120,000,000 won with the Plaintiff’s loan claim, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the above KRW 120,000,000 with compensation for damages for delay.

3. The obligee’s right of revocation with respect to the benefit of a lawsuit is a right to revoke the obligor’s act of disposal of the debtor’s property by fraudulent act and seek restitution, and is not a right to return the obligor’s property deviating from the fraudulent act to the obligor for total creditors, and is not a right to exclusively satisfy the obligee who exercises the obligee’s right of revocation.