1. As to real estate listed in the separate sheet:

A. The Defendant and Nonparty C concluded on May 15, 2017.

1. According to the purport of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2 as to the existence of preserved claims and the entire pleadings, the plaintiff set KRW 120,000,00 to C on June 25, 2015 as the maturity date of June 25, 2017, the agreed interest rate of KRW 18% per annum, and the date of payment of interest rate of KRW 28% per month, and C shall, at once, lose its interest within the period of delay; and C shall not pay its interest on the above loan from April 2017 to May 15, 2017.

According to the above facts, C is judged to have lost the benefit of the time limit for the above loan by delaying the payment of the funds as above. Thus, it is determined that the Plaintiff has a monetary claim equivalent to the above loan and its interest or delay damages against C with a preserved bond for the exercise of the obligee's right of revocation.

2. The requirement is that, in order for a certain creditor to become a fraudulent act to judge the intention of fraudulent act and C to furnish security to a certain creditor, it would result in a reduction in the joint security of other general creditors by allowing the debtor to be given preferential payment to the creditor only in excess of his/her obligations and the creditor only in preference to other creditors.

(See Supreme Court Decision, Apr. 25, 200, etc.). According to Gap evidence Nos. 3 through 7, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and as a result of this court’s order to submit tax information to the Cheongyang-gun of this court, the result of this court’s order to submit financial transaction information to the Korea Credit Information Institute and the entire purport of pleadings, C borrowed a total of KRW 40,000,000 from the defendant who was one’s own female-child, until July 27, 2016, and as of May 15, 2017, C borrowed a total of KRW 40,000,000 from the defendant who should reach the point of May 15, 2017 (hereinafter “instant real property”).