1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The following facts are acknowledged in full view of evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and the purport of the entire pleadings.

A. On November 30, 2017, the Plaintiff has a claim for damages for delay calculated by the rate of 30,000,000 won with principal and the rate of 15% per annum from November 3, 2017 to the date of full payment, which were finalized by the judgment of service by public notice (referring to the date of application for payment order: July 20, 2017; December 19, 2017) rendered by the Suwon District Court rendered on November 30, 2017.

B. On April 26, 2017, C entered into a contract with the Defendant for the sale of the instant apartment owned by itself at KRW 65,000,000 for the purchase price (hereinafter “the instant sale”). On July 6, 2017, Suwon District Court received the Songwon District Court’s receipt of the registration office, and completed the registration of ownership transfer under Article 22906.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion C is a fraudulent act to dispose of the instant apartment, which is the only real estate through the instant sales contract, under the condition that the Plaintiff’s assertion C bears the above obligation against the Plaintiff.

However, since the right to collateral security was established on the instant apartment after the completion of the registration of ownership transfer according to the instant sales contract, it is impossible to recover the instant apartment itself. Accordingly, the instant sales contract should be revoked within the limit of KRW 34,783,561, which is the amount of the above credit as of November 25, 2018, and the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff 34,783,561, and damages for delay.

B. The defendant's assertion is that the defendant acquired the apartment of this case normally through a licensed real estate agent, and does not know whether the sales contract of this case constitutes a fraudulent act.

3. Even if it is determined that the instant sales contract constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, a creditor, the following are acknowledged by the purport of evidence and evidence set forth in subparagraphs A and B and the premise for pleading.