1. On October 1, 2013, the Defendant and Nonparty B concluded on October 1, 201 with respect to one-half shares of the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) concluded a contract with the Plaintiff on March 1, 2012, and B jointly and severally guaranteed the said obligation.

According to the above order contract, the Plaintiff supplied ready-mixed from April 30, 2012 to July 29, 2013, and as of September 13, 2013, the balance of ready-mixed was KRW 551,256,350.

C On September 27, 2013, the Plaintiff prepared a letter of payment assurance (Evidence A6) and delivered it to the Plaintiff.

On October 2, 2013, the Plaintiff urged C and B to pay the amount of ready-mixed by content-certified mail.

On October 4, 2013, the Plaintiff filed an application with B for the payment order claiming the payment of the above ready-mixed price, and on February 7, 2014, the Ulsan District Court Decision 2013Gahap7994 decided that “B shall pay the Plaintiff 551,256,350 and its delay damages.”

B. B shared the instant real estate listed in its wife D and the separate sheet at the respective 1/2 shares. On October 1, 2013, the Defendant entered into a sales contract with the Defendant for his own shares among the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and completed the ownership transfer registration (hereinafter “instant ownership transfer registration”) on the same day.

C. B was in excess of the obligation at the time of the instant sales contract, and the Defendant was aware of it for a long time through scrap metal transactions, etc.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-9 evidence (including virtual number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. (1) In a case where the obligor’s property is insufficient to fully repay the obligor’s obligation, and where the obligor provided the obligor’s property to a certain obligee as payment in substitutes or as a collateral, barring any special circumstance, it constitutes a fraudulent act in relation to other obligees, barring any special circumstance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da85161, Sept. 10, 2009).