1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, citing this case, is that the court of first instance, except for the case where the fourth to fifth to fourth to second as set forth in the following paragraph (2), cited this case as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. On July 31, 2017, after the conclusion of the instant promise, the Defendant asserts to the effect that the instant promise to sell and purchase and the instant sales contract based thereon was not a fraudulent act, on the grounds that: (a) it is the best way to have the ability to repay the debt to continue the business by financing funds in circumstances where it is difficult for the Defendant to continue the business on July 31, 2017, when the Plaintiff entered into the instant promise to sell and purchase, and that the instant sales

Unless there exist special circumstances, the debtor’s act of creation of security interest does not constitute a fraudulent act, barring any special circumstance, in light of the following: (a) it is the best way for the debtor to continue his/her business by financing funds in a situation in which it is difficult for him/her to continue his/her business due to financial difficulties; and (b) if the debtor provided real estate as security to a certain creditor and received additional financing from him/her for financing funds, barring any special circumstance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da25842, Mar. 29, 200).

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed.