1. Each part of the subrogation right of the plaintiffs' conjunctive claims against the defendants is dismissed.

2...

Basic Facts

The rest of the plaintiffs and the defendants except the plaintiff SMMMMMM are creditors of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "F"), who reported as rehabilitation creditors from F rehabilitation procedures (Seoul Central District Court 2012 Ma45, hereinafter referred to as "the rehabilitation procedures in this case") to F Co., Ltd. as creditors.

On August 3, 2012, between F and Steel-Related Claims, a contract was made between F and Steel-Related Claim Group (Representative H) under which steel-related Claim Group (hereinafter referred to as “the instant steel”) recorded in F’s Schedule (hereinafter referred to as “the instant contract”) were transferred to the Steel-Related Claim Group (hereinafter “the instant contract”).

[Ground of recognition] In the absence of dispute, the Plaintiff’s assertion of the judgment as to the Plaintiff’s primary claim of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 and 2 and the entire pleadings constituted a contract to transfer the instant steel to the Defendants on August 3, 2012. However, as F did not have the ability to repay the obligees’ debts, the transfer agreement entered into between F and the Defendants constitutes a fraudulent act and thus ought to be revoked.

Therefore, the defendants jointly and severally deliver to the plaintiffs 200 tons of steel not yet disposed of, and the steel 800 tons already disposed of to the third parties are not yet restored to their original state.

Therefore, the amount of money equivalent to 756,870,048 won should be refunded as compensation for value.

In full view of the records in Gap's evidence No. 1, the fact-finding of the F Steel related claim group of this court, and the whole purport of the arguments, F made with the F Steel related claim group composed of F's creditors on August 3, 2012, and F Steel related claims group of F made its articles of incorporation and, based on this, selected its representative and officers and made activities such as recovery, disposal, and distribution of the price of the steel of this case. According to the above facts-finding, F made items No. 1 and 2 of evidence No. 1 and No. 2.