1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A.B borrowed a loan of KRW 40 million from the Korea Standards Bank Co., Ltd. on November 7, 2007 at the rate of 1 year, and the borrower’s interest rate of KRW 40 million at a rate of 4.7% for three months.

(hereinafter “instant loan”). (b)

The instant loan claims were transferred to the Plaintiff on January 27, 2014 through Dong Seo-gu Asset Management Loan Co., Ltd. on January 6, 2012.

C. On July 6, 2013, C, the owner of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on July 6, 2013, following the agreement on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant agreement on the division of inherited property”) with the content that the Defendant would own the instant real estate by himself between the co-inheritors, the co-inheritors, the defendant, the South-North, the women, G, the son, the son, and the women, H, who were the co-inheritors (hereinafter “the instant agreement on the division of inherited property”). According to the agreement on the division of inherited property of this case, on October 26, 2014, the registration office of the Daegu District Court was completed on October 26, 2014, the ownership transfer registration under the name of the defendant (hereinafter “the ownership transfer registration”).

As of November 19, 2014, B delays the payment of the loan principal of KRW 40 million to the Plaintiff, interest KRW 23,733,684, provisional payment KRW 4,919,127 to the Plaintiff.

F. B was the sole property owned by 2/13 of the inheritance shares among the instant real estate, and the publicly notified value of the instant real estate as of January 1, 2013 is KRW 123,00,000.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-1, 2-2, Gap evidence 2-5, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The agreement on the division of the inherited property of this case with the defendant on the share 2/13 of his statutory inheritance shares among the real estate of this case, which is the only property where the plaintiff's assertion B exceeds his obligation, constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the general creditors of B including the plaintiff.

Therefore, the agreement on the share of inheritance of this case should be revoked.