1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the Defendants shall be revoked.

2. The plaintiff's primary part against defendant C.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the first instance court's decision.

1. The facts of recognition are the same as the part of the facts of recognition (from the 6th to the 6th 6th 6th 6th ). Accordingly, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Judgment on the revocation of a fraudulent act

A. In circumstances where it is highly probable that the Plaintiff’s claim for indemnity against A and B may occur in the near future in the near future, the representative director of A, the principal debtor of the credit guarantee agreement of this case, and the joint guarantor B, the Defendants’ act of establishing a collateral security (hereinafter “each of the instant collateral security”) with respect to each of the instant real estate, which is almost the exclusive property of the Defendants, constitutes a fraudulent act against the Plaintiff, who is another general creditor, and the Defendants’ malicious intent is presumed.

Therefore, the first mortgage contract between B and Defendant C and the third mortgage contract between B and Defendant D should be revoked, and the Defendant C should cancel the first mortgage registration and the second and third mortgage registration, respectively.

B. (1) Determination 1) Whether a preserved claim is established is required that a claim protected by a creditor’s right of revocation is, in principle, arising prior to the commission of an act that can be viewed as a fraudulent act.

However, at the time of the fraudulent act, there is a high probability that there is a legal relationship which already serves as the basis of the establishment of the claim, and that the claim will be established in the near future, and in the near future, where the probability is realized and the claim has been created in the near future, such claim may also become a preserved claim.

According to the facts acknowledged earlier (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2011Da76426, Feb. 23, 2012), A and B shall jointly and severally serve as the Plaintiff the sum of KRW 554,294,940 (=1.).