1.With respect to shares of 2/11 of each of the real estates listed in Schedule 1 and Schedule 2,

A. On February 25, 2013, between the Defendant and B.

Facts of recognition

The Plaintiff applied for a payment order against B, seeking a transfer money from the Jyang-si District Court 2007Guj1712, the High Government Branch 2007Guj1712, and received a decision from the above court that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 20,664,765 and its delay damages.” The above decision was served on B on October 16, 2007, and became final and conclusive on the 31st of the same month.

B The father C owned the real estate (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) as indicated in [Attachment List 1 and 2]. Around 2013, the Defendant (the inheritor 3/11) who was the wife and his/her children, and the Defendant B, D, E, and F (the inheritor 2/11) jointly inherited the deceased’s property.

However, on February 25, 2013, the above inheritors agreed to own each of the instant real estate solely by the Defendant (hereinafter “divisions of inherited property”), and on April 2, 2013, each of the instant real estate was registered for transfer of ownership under the name of the Defendant on the ground of inheritance by agreement division under Article 29414, which was received by the High Government District Court, and the High Government Branch Branch Branch Branch Office of the High Court.

On the other hand, at the time of the division of the inherited property of this case, B did not have any active property other than the inheritance shares (2/11) concerning each of the real estate of this case.

【In the absence of dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 4, and 5 (including branch numbers), the fact-finding conducted by the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, and the fact-finding conducted by this court with respect to the defense prior to the merits of the whole pleadings, the defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case filed one year and six months after the lapse of one year and six months from the date on or around May 19, 2013 is unlawful since the defendant was aware of the fact that the ownership transfer registration was completed in the name of the defendant with respect to each real estate of this case, which is presumed to have been completed in the name of the defendant.

In the exercise of the right of revocation, the exclusion period shall be the same.