1. The sales contract concluded on January 15, 2013 between the Defendant and C with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet is KRW 23,240,420.

1. In full view of Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Gap's evidence Nos. 5, 6 (including paper numbers), Gap's evidence Nos. 7, 8, 10, 11, and 12, and the overall purport of the argument as a result of appraiser D's appraisal, the plaintiff is a creditor of 70,000,000 won loans to the defendant's living together, and Eul sold real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 364,40,000 won (hereinafter "the real estate of this case") to the defendant who is someone else on Jan. 15, 2013. At the time, Eul sold real estate with positive property of 264,40,000 won (i) to 2,1011, 2,011, 2, 305, 305, 300, 300,000 won, 356,4130,000 won and 3131.

(A) Although the Defendant’s defense was bona fide, it cannot be acknowledged in light of the evidence No. 8 with the content that the instant real estate was transferred to the Defendant but still owned by C).

A. In the event that a real estate on which a mortgage is established is transferred to a fraudulent act, such fraudulent act shall be deemed only to be established within the extent of the balance obtained by deducting the secured debt amount of the mortgage from the value of the real estate. In the event that the registration of establishment of a mortgage is cancelled by repayment after a fraudulent act, etc., to order the revocation of the fraudulent act and the restoration of the real estate itself would result in a violation of fairness and fairness, and thus, to the extent of the balance obtained by deducting the secured debt amount of the mortgage from the value of the real estate.