1. As to shares 2/17 of each real estate listed in the separate sheet:

A. It was concluded on July 20, 2010 between the Defendant and B.

1. Basic facts

A. On June 8, 2007, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B against the Seoul Central District Court 2006Gapo2247246, and the said court rendered a judgment that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 9,621,172 and delay damages therefor,” and the said judgment was finalized on July 10, 207, and the Plaintiff’s claim against B as of September 16, 2014 reaches KRW 44,560,190.

B. C, the owner of each real estate listed in the separate sheet, died, and the heir’s wife D, B, E, F, G, H, and I entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property on July 20, 2010 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the name of the Defendant solely under the name of the Daejeon District Court Daejeon District Court No. 19589, Sept. 7, 2010.

(c) B does not have any other property except 2/17 shares of each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the establishment of a fraudulent act, B entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property agreement with the purport that the portion of inherited property for the above real estate should be reverted to the defendant without any specific property, other than 2/17 shares of each real estate listed in the separate sheet. As such, the agreement on the division of inherited property constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the creditors including the plaintiff, and in such case, the defendant's bad faith

B. The defendant's argument concerning the defendant's assertion that the defendant did not know of the debt relationship B, for the defendant's hospital expenses and old age funds necessary for living, the remaining inheritors except the defendant agreed to divide the inherited property with the content of giving up inheritance. Thus, the defendant's argument that the defendant constitutes a bona fide beneficiary.

Modern, Eul evidence 1, 2, and Eul evidence 2.