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

The instant sales contract constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, who is a creditor, and thus ought to be revoked, and the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration in the name of the Defendant with respect to the instant real estate.

2. In light of the following circumstances, it is reasonable to view the Defendant as a bona fide beneficiary, in view of each description of the evidence Nos. 1 through 15 and the witness C’s testimony, by comprehensively taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings.

① The Defendant was an employee of the company operated by B’s husband C, and purchased the instant real estate upon C’s recommendation.

However, the Defendant retired from the company on June 2012 and operated a separate business at the time of the instant sales contract, and thus, it is difficult to deem that the Defendant was well aware of the property status of the couple B at the time of the instant sales contract.

② Moreover, the Plaintiff’s husband and wife asserted that he did not know the existence of tax in arrears before the instant lawsuit was filed.

③ The instant sales contract was concluded or implemented normally.

In other words, the Defendant determined the sales price of the instant sales contract as KRW 250 million, and paid the remainder of KRW 20 million as down payment, KRW 70 million as intermediate payment, KRW 50 million as the remainder, and KRW 140 million as the remainder of KRW 50 million, and the remainder of KRW 110 million as the secured debt of the right to collateral security established on the instant real estate was substituted by the Defendant’s acceptance.

Accordingly, the defendant on December 30, 2013 to C.