Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiffs' failure to correct is revoked.

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance, excluding the conclusion among the reasons for the entry in this case, is the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part as set forth below 2. Thus, this part shall be cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act (other than the following, the remainder of the claims are not significantly different from the contents asserted by the plaintiffs in the first instance trial. However, even if the evidence submitted by this court was added to the evidence submitted by the court in the first instance trial, it is legitimate to recognize the facts of first instance and determine the facts of the first instance). 2. The part which was filled up on February 2, 197, 4 Myeon 11 through 21 of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows.

2. Summary of the plaintiffs' assertion

A. Although the Defendants did not have a claim against F, they established the most claim under the instant agreement in order to prevent creditors, including the Plaintiffs, from executing the instant agreement, and prepared the instant fair deed, and received dividends in the instant distribution procedure.

Even if there are claims against the Defendants,

Even if the Defendants conspired with F for the purpose of receiving preferential repayment, they prepared the instant fair deed and had F bear new obligations.

Thus, each debt repayment contract entered into with the fair deed of this case constitutes an act of false representation or an act of harming general creditors' claims, and thus, the plaintiffs received dividends.

The difference between the amount of claims to be paid and the amount of dividends on the instant dividend table shall be revoked within the scope of KRW 122,894,332, which is known to each of the Defendant, and the correction of the instant dividend table, such as the statement on the purport of restitution to the original state, is sought (hereinafter “instant assertion 1”). (B) The Defendants received reimbursement of KRW 1,379,214,060 in total from F on April 28, 2017, and thus, the amount of credit on the instant agreement and the instant fair deed (each of KRW 2 billion) extinguished within the said scope.

Therefore, based on the remaining credit amount of the defendants, the amount of dividends to the defendants should be calculated again.