1. The part of the preliminary claim in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked;

The separate list between the defendant and E is as shown in the separate list.

1. Some of the reasons for the judgment of the first instance court are cited (the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act) and some of the reasons are as follows.

The 5th judgment of the first instance court is replaced by the following: “4. Judgment on the Claim for Cancellation of Provisional Registration”.

It is true that the defendant's assertion as to the scope of secured obligation and its repayment of the provisional registration of this case is not clear.

However, in order to seek cancellation of provisional registration, the obligor has the responsibility to prove that the secured obligation has been fully extinguished, and as seen thereafter, the transfer agreement of this case has been cancelled, and if it is gathered that the settlement of the secured obligation of provisional registration has again been required due to the cancellation of the transfer agreement of this case, the Plaintiff’s assertion that the secured obligation of provisional registration of this case has all extinguished cannot be accepted.

(b) 8 pages of the first instance judgment.

The contents of "the preliminary claim (cancellation of fraudulent act)" are changed as follows:

The agreement on the transfer of the real estate in this case to the defendant, one of the creditors, which was in excess of the debt, constitutes a fraudulent act.

At the time, the market price of the instant real estate was exceeded the Defendant’s provisional registration collateral obligation, and the liquidation procedure required by the Act on Provisional Registration Security, etc. was not implemented.

The Plaintiff’s assertion of revocation of fraudulent act is accepted, and the transfer agreement of this case is revoked.

The defendant has preferential right to payment regarding the real estate of this case within the scope of obligation secured by provisional registration.

However, the transfer agreement of this case was made in parts without any preferential right to payment, and there was no legitimate liquidation procedure for exercising preferential right to payment.

In the case of revocation of fraudulent act, restitution by original return is a principle, and provisional registration under the name of the defendant is maintained as it is, so the defendant is in a legitimate liquidation procedure.