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

A. On June 1, 2007, the Plaintiff concluded a credit card contract with the non-party D, the former husband of the Defendant.

D, while using a credit card, the credit card began to be in arrears from the beginning of 2018, and on December 26, 2018, 13,755,040 won was in arrears.

B. The defendant and D completed the marriage report on January 10, 2002, and among them, only one child born in 2002.

On January 19, 2018, the Defendants filed an application with this court for confirmation of the intention of divorce. On January 20, 2018, the Defendants agreed to donate 1/2 shares owned D among the instant real estate to the Defendant on the condition of divorce, child support and consolation money, and to pay 100,000 won per month as child support for three years. On May 14, 2018, the Defendants decided to rear minor children and agreed to do so.

C. On May 14, 2018, the Defendant acquired ownership of D’s 1/2 shares (hereinafter “instant shares”) on the ground of donation. On May 30, 2018, the Defendant completed a supplementary registration with respect to the alteration of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant shares”) with respect to the instant real estate, including the maximum debt amount of KRW 124,80,000,000, and the right to collateral security (EE) that is acquired from D.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 3 through 17, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff asserts that the transfer of D's shares to the defendant, the only property of this case, constituted a fraudulent act, while the defendant asserts that the transfer of D's shares to the defendant does not constitute a fraudulent act, since it does not deviate from the reasonable degree

3. Whether the act constitutes a fraudulent act;

A. In light of the fact that division of property according to the divorce of the relevant legal doctrine is a liquidation of common property formed through mutual cooperation between the parties during marriage, the support for the other party has not been the nature of supporting the other party. As a result, a debtor who has already been in excess of his/her obligation transfers a certain property to his/her spouse to division of property, thereby transferring