1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. The plaintiff's assertion B obtained a credit card from Hyundai Card Co., Ltd. and lost the benefit of time by delinquency in paying the credit card usage payment obligation, and Hyundai Card Co., Ltd. transferred the credit card use payment claim against B on June 30, 2003 to Hyundai Card Co., Ltd., and the above claim was transferred in sequential order and finally became the transferee of the claim. Since the payment order became final and conclusive because the plaintiff applied to the Seoul Western District Court for the payment order on the above claim, the agreement on division of inherited property between the defendant and B as the preserved claim constitutes a fraudulent act.

must be revoked.

2. The plaintiff cannot seek revocation of the fraudulent act, since the period of extinctive prescription of the defendant's defense against the revocation of the fraudulent act has expired.

3. On the other hand, even if the payment order against the plaintiff B was finalized, since the payment order against the plaintiff B does not have res judicata such as the judgment, B may claim the benefit of expiration of extinctive prescription against the above credit card use-price claim, and the beneficiary may also invoke this in the lawsuit for cancellation of fraudulent act.

Therefore, as to whether the extinctive prescription of the credit card user compensation claim of this case has expired, the above preserved credit card user compensation claim of this case, as a credit card user compensation claim of this case, is generally due after the credit card was used and due date for the following month, and even according to the plaintiff's assertion, Hyundai Credit Card Co., Ltd. transferred this right to a reduced loan. Since the above transfer date was June 30, 2003, the above credit card user compensation claim of this case was due and due to the due date of June 30, 2003, and the prescription period has expired from that time. Thus, the above credit card user compensation claim of this case was caused by commercial activities.