1. The inherited property concluded on January 31, 2018 with respect to 1/9 shares of the real estate listed in the separate sheet between the defendant and B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 14, 2017, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B seeking a transfer payment against “B shall pay to the Plaintiff 8,250,902 won and 4,324,325 won with 20% interest per annum from September 11, 2006 to the date of complete payment” (Seoul Central District Court 2017Da545018). The said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. The real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) was owned by C (hereinafter “the deceased”). On January 31, 2018, upon the death of the deceased, the Defendant, D, B, E, F, G, H, I, and J, who is the deceased’s children, entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant division agreement”) to solely inherit the instant real estate, and accordingly, on February 14, 2018, the ownership transfer registration under the Defendant’s name (hereinafter “instant transfer registration”).

C. B was in excess of the obligation at the time of the instant partition consultation, and there was no particular property other than the 1/9 share out of the instant real estate to be inherited from the deceased.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 2 through 5, fact inquiry results by the Minister of Court Administration of this Court, purport of whole pleadings

2. Revocation of a fraudulent act;

A. According to the facts acknowledged as above, the Plaintiff had a claim against B prior to the instant subdivision agreement, which constitutes a preserved claim against the obligee’s right of revocation.

B. The agreement on the division of inherited property 1 by fraudulent act is to confirm the attribution of inherited property by holding all or part of the inherited property provisionally owned by co-inheritors upon commencement of inheritance as separate ownership by each inheritor or performing as a new co-ownership relationship, and therefore, it can be subject to the exercise of the right to revoke the fraudulent act, and on the other hand, the debtor sells real property, which is the only property of himself.