The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The judgment of the court of first instance No. 1 and No. 2 are subject to objection.

1. The defendant's grounds for appeal citing the judgment of the court of first instance are not significantly different from the allegations in the court of first instance, and the fact-finding and judgment of the court of first instance are recognized as legitimate when based on the records in this

Therefore, the reasoning of the judgment of this court is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following amendments, and thus, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

As of July 24, 2018, the third 2-3 lines of the judgment of the first instance left KRW 97,238,620 as of July 24, 2018. Accordingly, the Plaintiff left KRW 97,238,620 as to C. As of July 7, 2020, the Plaintiff left KRW 48,964,230 as of July 7, 2020. Accordingly, the Plaintiff took the Plaintiff into account KRW 48,964,230 as to C.

Following the 7th day of the first instance judgment, “A debt Nos. 3 through 6” in the 2-1 line below the 7th day of the first instance judgment and Defendant’s small property Nos. 1 and 3 are raised to “a debt”.

Defendant L “B” is called “Defendant”. The Defendant is called “Defendant” in the first instance judgment.

The court of first instance shall order from 1 to 9 to 7 lines below 8:

As seen earlier, the fact that the registration of creation of a neighboring apartment of H was cancelled after the apartment of this case was donated to the Defendant. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in Gap evidence No. 6, the value of the apartment of this case was recognized as 222,50,000 won as of the date of closing argument of this case, and the amount calculated by deducting KRW 122,932,913 from the above amount obtained by deducting KRW 122,932,913 as the secured debt amount of H from the above amount is KRW 97,50,000, and thus the gift contract of this case shall be revoked within the scope of KRW 48,964,230 as seen earlier, and the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 48,964,230 won as well as damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum from the day following the day when the judgment of this case was finalized

2. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case should be accepted as it is reasonable. The judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit, but the judgment of the court of first instance Nos. 1 and 2 are affected.