1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The reasons why the court should explain in this decision are to use part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. In addition to the addition of the defendant's argument to "paragraph 3", the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

A. Article 21 of the first instance court's decision No. 4 of the first instance court's decision " alone cited by the defendant" provides that "The part " shall be written in each of the evidence No. 14 and No. 21 (including the number of serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and all the evidence submitted by the defendant to this court, including the testimony by the witness B of this court, and the circumstances of its assertion."

B. The third part of the fifth third part of the judgment of the court of the first instance is as follows: therefore, the defendant's main defense is without merit.

Therefore, the Defendant’s prior defense on the merits is without merit (this case’s prior defense is asserted to the effect that the period of exclusion has expired since the Defendant knows the establishment of F’s right to collateral and the status of excess of F’s obligation prior to October 1, 2015, as the instant right to collateral security was F’s right to collateral security prior to the instant right to collateral security.

However, in the exercise of the obligee's right of revocation, "the date when the obligee becomes aware of the cause for the revocation" means the date when the obligee becomes aware of the requirement for the obligee's right of revocation, namely, the date when the obligor becomes aware of the fact that the obligee had committed a fraudulent act while

At this time, in order for the creditor to be aware of the cause of revocation, it is not sufficient that the debtor simply knew of the fact that he/she conducted an act of disposal of property, and it is also known that he/she was aware of the existence of specific fraudulent act and that he/she had the intent to deception against the debtor