1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following portions, and thus, it shall be quoted for this judgment in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

▣ 제1심판결문 제2쪽 17행 ‘2008년’을 ‘2009년’으로, 18행 ‘2009년’을 ‘2010년’으로 각 고침 ▣ 제1심판결문 제3쪽 4행 ‘매매예약’을 ‘매매예약(이하 ’이 사건 매매예약‘이라 한다)’으로, 4 내지 5행 ‘소유권이전청구권가등기’를 ‘소유권이전청구권가등기(이하 ’이 사건 가등기‘라 한다)’로 각 고침 ▣ 제1심판결문 제3쪽 인정사실 ‘다. C의 재산상태’ 부분을 삭제 ▣ 제1심판결문 제3쪽 [인정근거] 부분을 다음과 같이 고침 『 [인정근거] 다툼 없는 사실, 갑 제2호증, 갑 제3호증의 2, 갑 제4 내지 7호증의 기재, 변론 전체의 취지 』 ▣ 제1심판결문 제4 내지 6쪽 ‘2. 청구원인에 관한 판단’의 ‘나.

Of the “Fraud Act”, the part of “1” at the time of the instant promise to sell and purchase was as follows: (a) the evidence as seen earlier, as well as the statement of “C’s debt excess at the time of the instant promise to sell and purchase,” and the statement of “C’s debt excess at the time of the instant promise to sell and purchase”; (b) the first instance court’s inquiry of the Korea Federation of Banks on March 11, 2015 to the Chairperson of the first instance court on the Korea Federation of Banks; and (c) the inquiry of the Korea Agency Standards and the purport of the entire pleadings by the appraiser K of the instant court on October 31, 2011.

(1) At the time of October 31, 201, the fact that there is no dispute over the amount of active property item (won) of C with 18,300,000 of the Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building Nos. 1807, 1807,00,000 of the 18 Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government D Building No. 18, 2201, No. 130,000 of the 22th floor of the building A82 Seoul Seocho-gu, and there is no dispute over the 1,130,000 of the 22nd floor of the building A82, Seocho-gu, Seoul.