1. The promise to trade concluded on October 12, 2016 between the Defendant and B on the 2,446 square meters in Kuju-si.

2...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, while lending KRW 30,000,00 to B on December 17, 2015, determined that the interest shall be 16.9% per annum and that the principal and interest shall be repaid in equal installments for 36 months from December 20, 2018.

B on June 20, 2017, the repayment of the above loan lost the benefit of time due to the default, and the principal of the loan unpaid is KRW 17,697,108.

B. On October 12, 2016, B entered into a trade reservation (hereinafter “instant promise”) with respect to the Defendant, who is one’s own partner, for the land of 2,446 square meters (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) and the Defendant entered into a trade reservation (hereinafter “instant promise”) and completed the registration of the Defendant’s claim for ownership transfer on October 12, 2016 and the registration of the Chuncheon District Court’s original branch support and the receipt of the claim for ownership transfer on October 12, 2016.

B received KRW 25,00,000 from the Defendant as a pre-sale deposit over October 12, 2016 and October 13, 2016.

C. The instant real estate is the only property B.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the facts of recognition as above, the Plaintiff’s above loan claim against B was already established at the time of the instant promise to sell and purchase, and thus, the above loan claim is subject to the obligee’s right of revocation.

B. Unless there are special circumstances, it is readily possible for the obligor to sell and consume real estate, which is only the only property, and to change it into money for consumption. The obligor’s intent of deception, which is a subjective element of fraudulent act, refers to the perception that there is a shortage of joint collateral for claims, and thus does not require any intent or intent to prejudice the obligee. In the event that the obligor sells real estate, which is only the only property, and changes into money for which it is readily possible for the obligor to consume it, the obligor’s intent of deception

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da2606 delivered on May 9, 1997, etc.). According to the above facts of recognition, B is its sole property.