1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the basic facts is the same as the statement under Paragraph 1 of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (the factual basis which is the premise of the judgment). Thus, this is cited by the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. The defendant asserts that the lawsuit of this case was unlawful, since the period of exclusion under Article 406(2) of the Civil Act (i.e., one year from the date when the creditor became aware of the cause of revocation) was filed after the lawsuit of this case was filed.

The "date when the creditor becomes aware of the ground for revocation" in the exercise of the creditor's right of revocation means the date when the creditor becomes aware of the requirements for the creditor's right of revocation, i.e., the date when the creditor becomes aware of the fact that the debtor had committed a fraudulent act with the knowledge that he would prejudice the creditor. Thus, it is not sufficient that the debtor merely knows that he/she conducted a disposal act of the debtor's property, and that such a legal act constitutes an act detrimental to the creditor, i.e., that the juristic act is an act detrimental to the creditor, i., a lack of joint security of the claim or a lack of joint security already in the deficient situation, making it impossible for the creditor to fully satisfy the claim, and that there was an intention to harm the debtor. However, it is not necessary for the creditor to know about the debtor's bad faith on the ground that the creditor had been aware of the fact that the provisional seizure was made in the course of the debtor's property's provisional seizure, compared with the total amount of his/her claim.

Supreme Court Decision 2001Da11239 Delivered on November 26, 2002