1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) Co., Ltd. E (hereinafter “E”), and in the case of a stock company, the entry of “stock company” is omitted.

D) On December 21, 2009, after transferring its shares to F, a director of E, he/she retired from the office of representative director on January 6, 2010. 2) D donated the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on August 4, 2010 to Defendant B, Defendant A, and grandchildren, who were his/her father.

(hereinafter “instant donation contract”). (b)

In August 2013, a public official of the Central Regional Tax Office affiliated with the Plaintiff for the imposition of taxes on D filed a complaint with G, H, and I on the data of G, H, and I, and conducted a tax investigation on E, which is the business partner.

As a result of the tax investigation, it was confirmed that E received false tax invoices from G, H, and I during the period from 2008 to 2010 without supplying goods or services, and as a result, D, which was the representative director at the time of 2008 and 2009, imposed global income tax and value-added tax due to the secondary tax liability as listed below on D.

(1) For the purpose of Article 13(1) of the Local Income Tax Act (amended by Act No. 1183, Dec. 31, 2013; Act No. 11835, Dec. 31, 2013; Act No. 11883, Dec. 31, 2013; Act No. 1883, Dec. 31, 2013; Act No. 1883, Dec. 31, 2013; Act No. 1884, Jun. 30, 2013; Act No. 1813, Dec. 31, 2013; Act No. 1814, Dec. 1, 2014; Act No. 1814, Dec. 30, 2015; Act No. 18168, Mar. 12, 2014; Act No. 1813, Mar. 14, 20197>

C. The Credit Guarantee Fund, a creditor of the case, sought reimbursement against D, and the Defendants seek revocation of the gift contract of this case and cancellation of transfer of ownership on the ground of fraudulent act.