1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C with Seogu District Court Decision 201Gau912, which states that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 14,753,934 and the amount calculated by the rate of 5% per annum from July 1, 2011 to January 26, 2012, and 20% per annum from the following day to the day of full payment,” and that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 14,753,934 and the amount of money calculated by the rate of 20% per annum from the following day to the day of full payment.”

B. On May 27, 2013, C entered into a sales contract with the Defendant to sell real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by C (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the Defendant in KRW 96,00,000 (hereinafter “instant contract”). On June 24, 2013, C received the above sales price from the Defendant, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate to the Defendant based on the instant contract.

C. C was in excess of obligations at the time of entering into the instant contract.

On the other hand, on June 21, 2013, the establishment registration of a mortgage (hereinafter “mortgage”) around KRW 48,000,000 on the instant real estate was completed on June 24, 2013 by the debtor, the NongHyup Bank Co., Ltd., and the maximum debt amount.

[Ground of recognition] No dispute, Gap 1 through 8 evidence (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul 1 through 7 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The allegations by the parties and the judgment thereof

A. The instant contract entered into with the Defendant as to the instant real estate, the sole property of which is the Plaintiff’s assertion (i.e., excess of the Plaintiff’s obligation), is a fraudulent act.

Accordingly, as stated in the purport of the claim, the Plaintiff cancelled the instant contract, which is a fraudulent act, within the scope of KRW 22,025,804, which is the principal and interest of the said decision of performance recommendation, and sought the payment of the said money to the Defendant by restitution.

Luxembourg Defendant is a bona fide beneficiary who purchased the instant real estate in a normal manner.

(b) judgment;