1. Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 26,738,323 and the interest rate of KRW 15% per annum from February 19, 2016 to the date of full payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 24, 2011, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against C with Seoul District Court as Seoul District Court Decision 201Da1559643, and on November 24, 2011, the said court rendered a judgment that “C shall jointly and severally pay to D and the Plaintiff 18,043,649 won, as well as KRW 9,929,040, the amount of KRW 15% per annum from January 1, 201 to November 22, 2011, and KRW 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive on January 11, 2012.

B. As to the instant real estate, C completed the registration of ownership transfer with Defendant B on October 24, 2005 due to donation.

C. On August 21, 2014, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Defendant B for the claim for ownership transfer registration under the Incheon District Court Decision 2014Gadan238835, and the above court rendered a judgment that “Defendant B shall implement the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the reason of the restoration of real name with respect to the instant real estate” on the ground that the donation contract between C and the Defendant constitutes a false representation on October 2, 2015, and the above judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

On the other hand, on November 1, 2015, Defendant B completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant real estate to Defendant A on October 29, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entries in Gap evidence 1 to 5 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that Defendant B lent to Defendant A the form of sale and purchase of real estate owned by the obligees for the purpose of evading the obligees’ compulsory execution on the instant real estate, and completed the registration of ownership transfer. The sales contract between the Defendants constitutes a false declaration of agreement and invalid.

Therefore, the plaintiff, who is the creditor of indemnity, claims for the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration completed with respect to the real estate in this case on behalf of the debtor C, and the defendant A is about the real estate in this case.