1. The part against Defendant B in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is dismissed.

2...

1. Article 1-B of the Reasons for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is to be stated.

Except the deletion of a claim, it is identical to the description of Paragraph 1, and thus, it is accepted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. The existence of the preserved claim has already occurred at the time of the fraudulent act, and there is a high probability that the claim will be established in the near future, based on the near future legal relationship, and in the near future, where the probability of the claim is realized and the claim has been created in the near future, such claim may also become the preserved claim of the obligee’s right of revocation.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da76426, Feb. 23, 2012). In addition, when a creditor exercises a creditor’s right of revocation, the creditor’s claim includes the interest or delay damages incurred after the fraudulent act and the end of arguments in fact-finding proceedings. The additional dues and increased additional dues provided for in Articles 21 and 22 of the National Tax Collection Act are the kind of incidental tax imposed in the sense of interest on the unpaid portion if national taxes are not paid by the due date, and if national taxes are not paid by the due date without the due date of payment without the due date of the taxpayer’s final procedure, the amount naturally created

Therefore, insofar as capital gains tax claims are recognized as preserved claims against obligee’s right of revocation, the amount of such capital gains tax includes additional charges and aggravated additional charges incurred after the fraudulent act and until the closing of argument in fact-finding proceedings (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da66753, Jun. 29, 2007). Although C did not actually have the Plaintiff’s capital gains tax claim by May 20, 2014, which is the final date when C remitted totaling KRW 635 million to the Defendants, according to the above recognized facts, the instant real estate sales contract, which is a legal relationship that serves as the basis for imposing capital gains tax, was already concluded on February 13, 2014.