1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

between Defendant B and G, as set out in the attached Table 1 list, the second real estate.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as follows, inasmuch as the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the Plaintiff and the Defendants, the relevant matters among the reasons for the judgment of the first instance, and thus, the same is acceptable pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Each “K” in the written judgment of the first instance court of the amended item that is “this Court” shall be both recorded as “the Jeju District Court”, and each “K” in the first instance court of the first instance that is corrected as “the appraiser of the first instance court”, respectively, as “I”, shall be corrected as “I”, respectively.

Section 2-A of the first instance judgment, which in turn removes all the contents of paragraphs 1, 2-(1)(3), 7-1(3), 4(4) and 5(5) of the first instance judgment by inserting “G” into the part of paragraphs 5(4) and 6(5) of the first instance judgment by inserting “G” into the part of paragraphs 1, 2-(3) and 18(8) through 19(5) and the part of the first instance judgment of the first instance judgment by inserting “A evidence 5” into “3’s evidence”.

The contents of the 7th to 10th 10 of the 7th 15 and 10th 2, which correspond to the content of the “establishment of the preservation claim”, shall be deleted; “The claim of this case was already constituted on May 25, 2010, which is prior to the date of each fraudulent act of this case”; and the “A No. 12” in the 11th 7th 7th 11th 7th 201 in the judgment of the first instance court, which added “A No. 18” to the evidentiary evidence, shall be corrected as “B”; and “the Plaintiff” in the 18th 6th 6th 19th 1 in the judgment of the first instance to “B” shall be corrected as “the Intervenor”; and “the Plaintiff” in the 19th 11th 2nd 1st 201” in the judgment of the first instance to “the intervenor”.

B. The Plaintiff added the following facts in the column for “basic facts” in the judgment of the first instance court of the item added to the instant lawsuit, and the part of the amount of indemnity liability owed by the Plaintiff to the Intervenor between the Intervenor and the Intervenor on August 28, 2014 during the instant lawsuit.