1. With respect to shares of 1/2 of the real estate listed in Schedule 2 and 3:

A. On March 27, 2013 between Defendant C and D.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 26, 2010, the Plaintiff filed an application with D for a payment order claiming payment of the purchase price of goods with the Daegu District Court 2010 tea2694, and the Plaintiff received an order for payment from D on March 26, 2010 that “D shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 27,210,300 and the annual interest rate of KRW 6% from October 2, 2009 to March 31, 2010, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.” The said payment order was finalized on April 15, 2010.

B. On April 3, 2013, D completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the real estate listed in attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter “instant one real estate”) with respect to Defendant B, as to the real estate listed in attached Table No. 1 (hereinafter “instant one real estate”), as the receipt of the Gwangju District Court No. 6313, Mar. 27, 2013.

(hereinafter “instant donation contract”). C.

D On April 3, 2013, Defendant C completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of donation on March 27, 2013, the receipt of the Gwangju District Court No. 63127, No. 63127, among the real estate listed in attached Tables 2 and 3 (hereinafter “instant 2 and 3 real estate”).

(hereinafter “instant donation contract”). D.

On the other hand, Defendant C is children between Defendant D and Defendant B.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 to 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. With respect to the Plaintiff’s assertion that D’s act of making the instant donation to the Defendants was a fraudulent act and sought cancellation of each transfer registration of ownership, which was completed in the future of the Defendants due to the revocation of each gift contract of this case and restoration to its original state, the Defendants donated the instant real estate to Defendant B under the pretext of solatium’s liability in the course of divorce with Defendant B, and the donation of each of the instant 1/2 shares out of the instant 2 and 3 real estate to Defendant C to Defendant C was agreed to substitute for the division of property against Defendant B, which is in excess of a considerable degree as a result of division of property.