1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion B entered into an membership agreement with the Plaintiff on June 16, 2005 and was issued a credit card.

B as a member of the Plaintiff, the credit card was loaned KRW 4.3 million from the Plaintiff on February 20, 2012, and KRW 11,00 million on March 18, 2013 on condition of repayment after 24 months, and credit card was also used. As of June 7, 2016, loans and credit card usage fees, etc. to be repaid to the Plaintiff as of June 7, 2016, are principal KRW 19,404,585, 285,527, 15,484,506, interest (including depreciation interest) 1,382,09, in total, KRW 36,56,627.

On the other hand, it was from March 21, 2013 that B was unable to pay the Plaintiff credit card fee, etc.

B signed a mortgage agreement with the Defendant on March 18, 2013 on each real estate listed in the separate sheet, and completed the registration of establishment of a neighboring mortgage, which is the debtor B, and the debtor B and the mortgagee of a collateral security, as of March 19, 2013, by the High District Court of the Jeonju on March 19, 2013.

Each of the above immovables is the sole property of B, and B is anticipated to be unable to pay the Plaintiff the credit card fee, etc., and B was set up a collateral security prior to three days prior to the date of the above arrears, which takes precedence over the general creditors.

The act in B is a fraudulent act against the general creditor such as the plaintiff.

In addition, B bears the obligation of KRW 10 million to the Bank on July 23, 2013 in addition to the above obligation against the Plaintiff, and KRW 2,103,00 on our card on June 20, 2013, and KRW 12,93,000 on Samsung Card on June 25, 2013, KRW 27,40,000 on the Chinese Commercial Life on July 8, 2013, and KRW 22,563,00 on June 25, 2013, and the Korea Asset Management Corporation bears the obligation of KRW 94,741,00 in total with KRW 22,563,00 on June 25, 2013, and there is no active property other than each real property indicated in the separate sheet.

Therefore, as to B's fraudulent act, the defendant should be viewed as bad faith.

Therefore, the contract to establish a mortgage on March 18, 2013 concerning each real estate listed in the separate list between B and the defendant constitutes a fraudulent act.