1. A donation contract concluded on September 1, 2015 between the Defendant and B on September 1, 2015 with respect to one-half share of the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is a company with the purpose of issuing and managing credit cards. B is a person who obtained a credit card from the Plaintiff and used it, and the Defendant is the spouse B.

B. B entered into a credit card subscription agreement with the Plaintiff on May 14, 2015, and had been used by the Plaintiff with the credit card issued by the Plaintiff, and began to delay in the repayment of the credit card payment from the end of 2014. From October 30, 2015, B was liable for the credit card payment amounting to the sum of KRW 5,109,651, interest and arrears KRW 161,169, and KRW 5,270,820 (=5,109,651, KRW 161,169).

C. The real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) was jointly owned by B and the Defendant. On September 1, 2015, B entered into a contract with the Defendant to donate his/her share (1/2 share) among the instant real estate to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant donation contract”). On September 2, 2015, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer as the receipt of the registration office of the Gwangju District Court on September 2, 2015 with respect to the 1/2 share out of the instant real estate as the registration office of the Gwangju District Court.

At the time of the donation contract of this case, B bears a large number of obligations other than credit card usage charges against the plaintiff. On the contrary, active property was the only property of 142,50,000 won among the real estate of this case, the market price of which is 142,50,000 won.

E. Of the instant real estate, B’s share was established with the maximum debt amount of KRW 72,00,000, the mortgagee C’s right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”). However, the instant right to collateral security was cancelled due to termination on September 25, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, Eul evidence Nos. 5, 6, and 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assistant intervenor who filed an application for intervention with the plaintiff on the ground that the plaintiff's assistant intervenor's motion for intervention is legitimate, ex officio, and the plaintiff's assistant intervenor's claim for the takeover of B