1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. The defendant and C, who are married couple, completed the registration of ownership transfer on September 4, 2007, each of 1/2 shares of the instant real estate listed in the separate sheet.

B. On September 1, 201, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 140,000,00 to C as of July 30, 2013.

C. The Defendant and C married on February 3, 199 and divorced on August 29, 2012. On July 3, 2012, 2012, before the divorce, C donated 1/2 of the instant real estate to the Defendant on July 3, 2012, which was immediately before the divorce, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with the Busan District Court’s Dong Branch Branch No. 6507 on July 4, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1, 2, Eul's Evidence No. 13, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion C and the Defendant owned 1/2 shares of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet. As such, it is reasonable to hold each share at the time of division of property by divorce, and purchase the said real estate with the Defendant’s money.

Even if C has contributed to the acquisition and maintenance of the above real estate, it is necessary to divide the property according to the contribution. However, the gift contract between the Defendant and C, which is the division of the entire property owned by the Defendant, on July 3, 2012, should be revoked as it constitutes a fraudulent act due to excessive division of property exceeding a considerable degree. The Defendant should implement C with the procedure for cancelling the registration of transfer of ownership as to shares of 1/2 of the above real estate.

3. Unless there are special circumstances to deem that the judgment on division of property is excessive beyond a considerable degree pursuant to the purport of Article 839-2(2) of the Civil Act, it shall not be subject to revocation by a creditor as a fraudulent act, and the burden of proving that there are special circumstances to deem it as excessive division of property beyond a considerable degree is on the part of the plaintiff as the creditor.

(See Supreme Court Decision 200Da14101 delivered on July 28, 2000, etc.). The mere fact that C donated one-half shares of the instant real estate to the Defendant, the wife of which is the Defendant.