1. The plaintiff's action against the defendant A shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is all dismissed.

3...

1. The following facts are found to be without dispute between the parties or recognized by considering the overall purport of the pleadings as a whole in each entry in Gap evidence of No. 1 to No. 4 (including evidence with a serial number):

A. On December 3, 1997, the Seodaemun-gu Saemaul Savings Depository (hereinafter “Seong-gu Saemaul Savings Depository”) (hereinafter “Seong-gu Saemaul Savings Depository”) determined on December 3, 199 as the interest rate of KRW 14.5% per annum and the due date of repayment on December 3, 200.

B. On June 28, 2013, the non-party credit cooperative transferred the claim for the above loan to Defendant A on behalf of the non-party credit cooperative, and on behalf of the non-party credit cooperative, the Plaintiff notified the Defendant A of the assignment of the claim.

C. On November 26, 2014, Defendant A entered into a donation agreement with Defendant B on the share of real estate stated in the purport of the claim (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer stated in the purport of the claim with Defendant B on November 28, 2014.

Meanwhile, as of December 17, 2014, the amount of the principal and interest of Defendant A that the Plaintiff acquired is the sum of KRW 24,606,138,138 as of December 17, 201, the principal and interest of KRW 2,927,195, interest of KRW 21,678,943.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion asserts that the act of donation of the real estate of this case, which is the only property to Defendant A, the wife, is a fraudulent act, and that the above real estate should be revoked, and that the above donation contract entered into between the defendants should be revoked, and that the ownership of the real estate of this case should be transferred again to Defendant A due to restitution to its original state.

B. If a creditor who finds the legitimacy of a lawsuit against Defendant A intends to exercise the right of revocation, he/she may file a lawsuit against a person who has received any benefit by a fraudulent act or a person who acquired such benefit, claiming the revocation of the juristic act, and such lawsuit against the debtor is not allowed

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Da13717 delivered on August 13, 1991, etc.).