The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1. Purport of the claim.

In accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, it is identical with the judgment of the first instance court on the occurrence of the right to claim the purchase price and the conclusion of the mortgage contract between B and the defendant.

Whether a fraudulent act constitutes a fraudulent act (1) in excess of the obligation as stated in the following table may be acknowledged in full view of the following: (a) the record as to Gap’s 5, 6, 8, 9, and Eul’s 3 and 5 evidence; and (b) the fact-finding results with respect to the court of the first instance; and (c) the fact-finding results with respect to the Yangyang Saemaul Depository of the Korean court, and the overall purport of the arguments: (a) as of March 30, 2011, B entered into the instant mortgage contract;

Unless there is any evidence as to the appraised value calculated at the auction procedure of KRW 150,1580,000 of the forest land of this case, the market price is reasonable to be assessed as the proceeds from auction sale on August 30, 2012 near the base point of time.

B We do not accept the defendant's assertion that the sale amount of the forest of this case to the plaintiff around 2006 or the sale amount by the auction purchaser to a third party should be considered as the market price again.

The actual sale price of the instant real estate in KRW 350,870,400 shall be KRW 310,000,000, or the appraised value calculated according to legitimate procedures at the auction procedure may be deemed as the market price.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da69026 Decided April 27, 2001). 687,000 won (=68,700 won x 10 million won x 10,000 won x 10,000 won (H apartment 110,700 won x 713,137,400 won totaling active property of H apartment 110,703,137,400 won, and 843,945,205 won totaling the obligation to return the purchase price to the Plaintiff of the small property and its related amounting to KRW 880,000,000,000 per annum from February 23, 201 to March 30, 2011, the Defendant’s obligation to the Defendant with a debt of KRW 150,000,000,000 to the Defendant, one of the several creditors’ debts exceeding KRW 13,532,52030,00,000.