1. The Defendant and Nonparty B made a pre-sale agreement concluded on October 16, 2014 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 20, 2009, Yong-Nam Savings Bank Co., Ltd. loaned 3 billion won at the interest rate of 11% and 23% at the overdue interest rate to the Future Development Loon Co., Ltd., and Nonparty B jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligations.

B. In the process of auction and distribution of real estate owned by the United Nations, Yong-Nam Savings Bank: (a) paid out KRW 596,423,060 on January 30, 2012; and (b) KRW 2,511,149,524 on June 27, 2012 to cover part of the loans.

C. On September 26, 2013, Yong-Nam Savings Bank Co., Ltd. was declared bankrupt on September 26, 2013 by Busan District Court Decision 2013Hahap16, and the Plaintiff was appointed as a trustee in bankruptcy on the same day.

On July 1, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a payment order with the Busan District Court No. 2014Guj9213 against the Future Development Vi. B, etc., and received a payment order from the above court to the effect that the Plaintiff would jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiff KRW 1,108,898,195 and its demand procedure expenses. The payment order became final and conclusive on July 26, 2014.

E. On October 16, 2014, the Defendant entered into a trade reservation (hereinafter “instant reservation”) with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant reservation”) with B, and completed the provisional registration of the right to claim ownership transfer (hereinafter “instant provisional registration”) on October 17, 2014 by the Changwon District Court’s receipt of Sacheon Branch Office of Registration No. 25161.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The act of an obligor offering real estate, the sole property of which exceeds his/her obligation, as collateral to one of his/her creditors, constitutes a fraudulent act subject to the obligee’s right of revocation in relation to other creditors (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da43352, Apr. 12, 2002). Each of the descriptions and arguments in subparagraphs 1 and 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings, barring any special circumstances.