1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. From September 18, 2009 to September 18, 2011, C worked as an internal director of A Savings Bank (hereinafter “A Savings Bank”), and the Defendant is denied.

B. The Plaintiff, as a trustee in bankruptcy of the A Savings Bank, filed a claim for damages against C due to illegal loans to the large shareholders of the A Savings Bank, illegal loans in violation of loan-related regulations, and illegal loans through borrowed loan holders (Seoul Central District Court 2013Gahap505275), and C bears at least 62,50,000 won against the A Savings Bank.

On the other hand, C was sentenced to imprisonment on July 31, 2012 due to the violation of the Act on the Aggravated Punishment, etc. of Specific Economic Crimes (Misappropriation), violation of the Act on External Audit of Stock Companies, violation of the Financial Investment Services and Capital Markets Act, violation of the Mutual Savings Banks Act

C. C deposited KRW 6,50,000,000 on October 5, 2009, KRW 500,000 on the Defendant’s Han Bank D account, KRW 5 million on February 11, 2010, KRW 7,500,000 on March 24, 2010, KRW 10,000 on September 27, 201, KRW 23,000 on January 23, 201, KRW 500,00 on February 5, 201, KRW 1,000 on February 21, 201, KRW 2,50,00 on March 22, 201, KRW 6,50,000,00 on the aggregate, including KRW 1,50,000 on March 22, 201.

(hereinafter “each of the instant transfers”) D.

A Savings Bank was declared bankrupt on August 31, 2012 by the Suwon District Court as 2012Hahap23, and the plaintiff was appointed as the company's capital administrator on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 3-1 and 3-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of the cause of claim constitutes a gift to the Defendant, who is the spouse, from October 5, 2009 to March 22, 201, under the status that C bears the same obligation as Paragraph 1.B to A Savings Bank. This constitutes a fraudulent act that further deepens its excess of its obligation.

Therefore, a donation contract between C and the defendant for each of the transfers of this case shall be revoked by fraudulent act, and the defendant shall be accordingly.