1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

First, we examine the legitimacy of the instant lawsuit.

According to Article 406 (2) of the Civil Act, when an obligor performs a juristic act aiming at a property right with the knowledge that it would prejudice the obligee, a lawsuit for revocation of the obligee seeking such cancellation and restitution shall be brought within one year from the date on which the obligee becomes aware of the cause for revocation and within five years from the date on

In full view of the purport of the argument in Gap evidence No. 2, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit of demurrer against the defendant with the purport that the distribution of dividends against the defendant is improper, unless the defendant proves that the contract to establish a mortgage was bona fide, such as the written claim between the defendant and C, was a fraudulent act. The above court can file a lawsuit against the defendant on September 25, 2014 by means of a lawsuit with the court, and cannot be asserted as a means of attack and defense in the lawsuit. Thus, the plaintiff's assertion that the above contract to establish a mortgage constitutes a fraudulent act and the conclusion of the above contract to establish a mortgage constitutes a fraudulent act is without merit. The plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the defendant on November 11, 2015 with the court as the second sentence of 2015Ka34901, but it was obvious that the lawsuit was withdrawn on July 17, 2016 and the second sentence of this case were withdrawn.

Thus, the plaintiff knew that the contract to establish the mortgage of this case constitutes a fraudulent act at the latest around September 25, 2014, and since the lawsuit of this case was filed more than one year after the lawsuit of this case, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful for the exclusion period.

Therefore, we decide to dismiss the instant lawsuit and decide as per Disposition.