The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the argument in the evidence No. 1 of basic facts as to May 4, 2006, Cheongju District Court 2006Da172,534 won and double 107,120,514 won to the Plaintiff on May 4, 2006, 18% per annum from March 25, 2005 to May 31, 2005; 15% per annum from the next day to March 3, 2006; 20% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment; 30% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment; 20% per annum from the next day to May 18, 2016 to the day of complete payment; 30% per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment; 208Da12946, May 18, 2016 to the day of complete payment; 305% per annum from 208,5.15% per annum

2. Judgment on the main claim

A. The Plaintiff asserted that the primary cause of claim in this case is the Plaintiff’s primary cause of claim, and the Plaintiff’s obligor B entered into a contract to donate cash on June 12, 2017 to the Defendant, who is a parent, and paid KRW 15,000,000 to the Defendant. It asserts that the Plaintiff’s revocation of a monetary donation contract between B and the Defendant on June 12, 2017 constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, a general creditor, and sought payment of KRW 15,00,000 to the Defendant by restitution.

B. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in the evidence No. 1 and No. 3, it is not sufficient to acknowledge the existence of a cash donation contract between B and the Defendant on June 12, 2017. Furthermore, as to whether there was a cash donation contract between B and the Defendant on June 12, 2017, each of the evidence No. 2 and No. 12, and No. 5 (including the provisional number), and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.

Therefore, the plaintiff's assertion is without merit without further review.

3...