1. The contract of donation concluded on December 6, 2018 between the defendant and C with respect to the real estate stated in the attached Form shall be revoked.

2...

1. Facts of recognition;

A. As to C, a notary public holds a notarial deed against C on a monetary loan agreement of KRW 10,000,000 as the principal amount, No. 164, 2014.

B. On November 15, 2018, the Plaintiff received a collection order against C with the title of execution, as the Daejeon District Court 2018TTT14303, the amount claimed by the Daejeon District Court 23,372,603.

C. Meanwhile, on October 19, 2018, E limited liability companies, which are other creditors of C, voluntarily withdrawn the application for auction on December 3, 2018, as to real estate stated in the attached Form C owned on October 19, 2018.

On December 6, 2018, the Defendant, as his father, donated real estate as indicated in the [Attachment] from the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant donation contract”), and completed the registration of transfer of ownership under the name of the Defendant under the name of Gwangju District Court No. 13756 on the same day for this reason.

E. C donated the real estate stated in the separate sheet, the sole property to the Defendant, and thereafter, the credit rating was lowered to 10 levels at 8. On March 7, 2019, Daejeon District Court 2019 Congress 7794, and the creditors of the above rehabilitation case were eight persons including the Plaintiff.

F. Of the real estate stated in the separate sheet, the standard market value of the building is KRW 2,826,450, and KRW 5,507,600,000, respectively.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Comprehensively taking account of the above facts acknowledged as the right to revoke a fraudulent act, C donates real estate listed in the separate sheet, which is the only property of the Defendant, to the Defendant in excess of the obligation, and thereby would constitute a fraudulent act against the Plaintiff, who is the obligee. It is presumed that the instant donation contract was made with the intent to impair the Plaintiff. It is presumed that the Defendant also recognized that the joint security of the Plaintiff and other general creditors would be more deficient due to the donation.

Therefore, it is true.