1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, parts of the judgment against Defendant C and D, including the claims extended at the trial, are as follows:

1. The reasoning for this part of this Court’s reasoning is the same as the part of “1. Basic Facts” of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

(However, the “Defendant A Co., Ltd.” is deemed to be “Co-Defendant A Co., Ltd. in the first instance trial,” “Defendant Co-Defendant Company” to be “Co-Defendant Company in the first instance trial,” and “Defendant B” to be “Co-Defendant B in the first instance trial”). 2. Whether there exists a preserved claim against the Plaintiff’s co-Defendant B in the first instance trial (hereinafter “B”).

In principle, it is required that a claim that can be protected by the obligee’s right of revocation has arisen prior to the commission of an act that can be viewed as a fraudulent act. However, at the time of such fraudulent act, there has already been legal relations that serve as the basis of the establishment of the claim, and there is high probability that the claim should be established in the near future by such legal relations, and in the near future, where a claim has been created as a result of its realization in the near future,

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 99Da53704, Feb. 25, 200). At the time of the conclusion of the first and second sales contract of this case, the Plaintiff did not actually incur the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity against B, but the first and second guarantees had already been concluded before the conclusion of the first and second sales contract of this case, which form the basis of the claim for indemnity, and B had “A” as of the first and second guarantees.

) The joint and several guarantee of the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Plaintiff; A entered into a credit transaction agreement with the Korean bank upon submitting the Plaintiff’s credit guarantee related to the Plaintiff’s first and second guarantee; (i) borrowed a loan of KRW 200 million in total from the Korean bank (i.e., a loan of KRW 1.2 billion in total from the second guarantee of KRW 1.2 billion under the first guarantee; and (ii) due to the occurrence of a credit guarantee accident due to the late payment of the principal and interest on September 7, 2015 with respect to each of the above loans to the Korean bank.