1. With respect to real estate listed in the annex:

(a) a pre-contract entered into on April 11, 2017 between the Defendant and B (C).

1. Basic facts

A. On January 7, 2005, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with B on January 7, 2005 with the guaranteed principal of KRW 20 million, and issued a credit guarantee certificate to B from January 7, 2005 to January 7, 2006. 2) B obtained a loan from Gyeongnam Bank based on the credit guarantee agreement, but failed to repay the loan properly.

3) On April 24, 2006, the Plaintiff paid B’s loans of KRW 19,80,211 (principal principal of KRW 19,454,350, interest 345,861) to Gyeongnam Bank (hereinafter “B”). The Plaintiff filed a claim for reimbursement against B by this court, and was sentenced on June 29, 201 to “B shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount calculated at the rate of KRW 17% per annum from April 24, 2006 to the date of full payment.”

The above judgment was finalized on July 23, 2011.

B. B’s property disposal 1) The Plaintiff urged B to perform his/her obligation on March 30, 2017, while failing to repay his/her obligation, and simultaneously at the same time, owned by B (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

(2) On April 12, 2017, B sent a notice of scheduled auction to implement an auction. On April 12, 2017, B made a registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership in the future against the Defendant on the ground of the pre-sale agreement as of April 11, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4 (including provisional number), and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. 1) The Defendant’s act of disposing of the instant real estate, the sole property of which the Plaintiff’s obligation was not repaid for a long time, constitutes an act detrimental to the obligee. As such, the promise to sell and purchase between B and the Defendant ought to be revoked by fraudulent act; and the Defendant is obligated to cancel the registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership, which was made on the ground of the said promise to sell and purchase. 2) The Defendant, the owner of the building, was normally

The real estate of this case is owned by D only in the name and title B.