1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning for the court's explanation of this case is that the witness C's testimony is insufficient to recognize the defendant's bad faith, and the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the part of the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for partial dismissal of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

2. Parts to be dried;

A. The registration No. 32,35 of the judgment of the court of first instance was cancelled on the ground of the principal registration of the provisional registration of this case, and the registration No. 32,35 of the provisional registration of this case was cancelled on the ground of the principal registration of the provisional registration of this case (However, even according to the defendant's assertion, the provisional registration of this case is not a provisional registration based on the sale promise, but a provisional registration to secure C's loan obligation to G, and it is merely a provisional registration to secure C's loan obligation, and thus, even if the provisional registration of this case was transferred from G and the principal registration was completed after the transfer of the provisional registration of this case, the provisional registration of this case remains effective on the ground that the provisional registration of this case remains valid on the ground that the provisional registration of this case had the effect of security (see Supreme Court Decision 95Nu15193, Dec. 20, 196).

B. No. 6. 21 and 22 of the judgment of the court of first instance: (1) The defendant clearly stated that the registration of seizure and provisional seizure completed in the instant real estate in the instant sales contract would be cancelled until the remainder payment is made; and (2) In a lawsuit for revocation of fraudulent act, it is not an issue whether the beneficiary's good faith is an issue, and whether the beneficiary's good faith is negligent (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da74621, Jul. 10, 2008).