1. The plaintiff's action against the defendant A shall be dismissed.

2. As to the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff.

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the sales contract concluded on November 3, 2014 with respect to the instant real estate between Defendant A and Defendant B (hereinafter “instant contract”) was a fraudulent act and sought revocation of the instant contract and the cancellation of the transfer of ownership registration against Defendant A.

As to this, Defendant A asserts that the instant lawsuit was brought after the limitation period expires.

However, pursuant to Article 406(2) of the Civil Act, when an obligor performs a legal act aimed at property rights with the knowledge that it would prejudice the obligee, a lawsuit for revocation and a lawsuit for revocation of a obligee seeking restitution shall be brought within one year from the date when the obligee becomes aware of the cause for revocation and within five years from the date when the obligee becomes aware of the cause for revocation, which constitutes a limitation period. According to the purport of the whole pleadings, the Plaintiff is a person who becomes aware of the conclusion of the contract of this case around June 2015, and the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for revocation of a fraudulent act of this case seeking cancellation of the contract of this case and restitution therefrom on September 7, 2016 after one year from the date when the Plaintiff becomes aware of the fact that the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for revocation of the fraudulent act of this case, which

(P) Even if the exclusion period was not excessive, the Plaintiff did not call the court to prove the establishment of the fraudulent act including Defendant B’s insolvency, and did not prove any assertion as to the establishment of the fraudulent act). 2. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B

A. Claim for the registration of ownership transfer pursuant to a contract of subrogation under the condition of suspension concluded on July 10, 2012 between the Plaintiff with the indication of claim and Defendant B

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act (Judgment on deemed as private capital);

3. Thus, the plaintiff's lawsuit against the defendant A is unlawful and dismissed. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified and it is so decided as per Disposition.