The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The judgment of the first instance.

1. Basic facts

A. B entered into a credit guarantee agreement with the Plaintiff on September 19, 2012, and received a loan of KRW 50,000,000 from L corporation as security, after obtaining a credit guarantee agreement from the Plaintiff.

B. On April 6, 2018, L Co., Ltd. notified the Plaintiff of the occurrence of a guarantee accident on the ground of the closure of business. On April 13, 2018, the Plaintiff subrogated for KRW 30,69,735 to L Co., Ltd. on behalf of the Plaintiff.

Since then, the Plaintiff’s liability for reimbursement against the Plaintiff was recovered in part from B (=30,454,942 of the amount of subrogated payment: KRW 30,454,875 of the amount of subrogated payment plus KRW 67 of the amount of KRW 30,454,875 of the amount of subrogated payment) and damages for delay from April 13, 2018 of the amount of KRW 30,454,875.

C. On May 31, 2002, the Defendant, who was married with B on May 31, 2002, had a minor under the chain, and agreed on August 30, 2017, that the Defendant raised three children, but the Defendant shall pay KRW 170,000,00 to the Defendant as child support.

B on September 7, 2017, the Guri-si N apartmentO (hereinafter “instant apartment”) sold in KRW 372,00,000 to C and D, which is the only real property of B, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on November 22, 2017.

C transferred 69,546,050 won to the Defendant out of the remainder under the above sales contract.

E. On December 1, 2017, the Defendant confirmed his/her intention to divorce and completed the report of divorce on December 12, 2017.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1-10, Eul evidence Nos. 1-10, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant’s donation of KRW 69,546,050 out of the purchase price to the Defendant on November 22, 2017 by selling the instant apartment, which is the only property of the Plaintiff B, under excess of his/her obligation, constitutes a fraudulent act.

Even if B paid the above money to the Defendant under the child support payment contract concluded on August 30, 2017, this constitutes a fraudulent act which goes beyond the considerable extent as a child support payment.

Therefore, the contract of donation between the defendant and B on November 22, 2017 is made.