1. A donation contract concluded on November 27, 2017 between the Defendant and Nonparty B regarding the real estate stated in the separate sheet.

1. Basic facts

A. On December 18, 2013 and October 16, 2015, the Plaintiff entered into a credit guarantee agreement with C (hereinafter “each of the instant guarantee agreements”) setting the respective guarantee principal as KRW 90 million and the term of guarantee as of December 18, 2014 and October 14, 2016 (hereinafter “each of the instant guarantee agreements”), and B, as the representative director of the non-party company, as the representative director of each of the instant guarantee agreements, jointly and severally guaranteed the indemnity obligations owed by the said company pursuant to the respective guarantee agreements.

B. Nonparty Company submitted a guarantee under each of the instant guarantees agreements, and received loans from E Bank KRW 100 million on December 18, 2013, and KRW 100 million on October 22, 2015, respectively.

(hereinafter “each of the instant loans”) C.

On March 23, 2017, the Plaintiff paid 91,609,556 won to the F Bank on behalf of Nonparty Company on March 23, 2017 and 91,382,289 won to E Bank on March 31, 2017.

On November 29, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a payment order with Nonparty Company B with the Daegu District Court 2017 tea30539, and received payment order with Nonparty B, “B jointly and severally with Nonparty Company B, shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 184,042,985, and delay damages therefor.”

E. On November 27, 2017, B entered into a gift agreement with the Defendant, the spouse, on the attached list of the real estate (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as its sole property (hereinafter “instant gift agreement”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant real estate on the same day.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, fact inquiry results to the Minister of Court Administration of this Court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above findings of the determination as to the cause of the claim, B shall be the defendant, who is the only property under excess of the obligation.