1. The main part of the lawsuit in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's conjunctive claim is dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. On May 7, 2015, the Plaintiff’s claim against C was sentenced to the Daejeon District Court Decision 2015Kadan501 rendered to C that “the Plaintiff shall pay 58 million won and the amount calculated by the rate of 20% per annum from February 5, 2015 to the date of full payment.” On May 12, 2015, the Plaintiff was sentenced to the Daejeon District Court Decision 2015Da543 in the lease deposit case, “the amount of KRW 20 million and the amount calculated by the rate of 20% per annum from February 5, 2015 to the date of full payment,” and each of the above decisions became final and conclusive as is.

B. A change in the name of the owner of the instant building in the name of the building owner) C is a real estate listed in the separate sheet on the ground of D land at the time of official land ownership, which he/she owned (hereinafter “instant building”).

A) On December 15, 2014, while building the building owner, the name of the building owner was changed from his/her own wife to the Defendant (hereinafter “instant title change agreement”).

(2) In the voluntary auction procedure for the above land, E and F purchased each one-half of the above land, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on August 24, 2015. On November 2, 2015, the Daejeon District Court rendered a provisional disposition prohibiting the disposal of the above building by designating the right to claim the removal of the building in this case as the right to be preserved, and on the same day, the registration of ownership preservation was completed in the name of the defendant with respect to the building in this case due to the entrustment of the provisional disposition registration pursuant to the above decision.

C. The Plaintiff’s creditor revocation lawsuit 1) The Plaintiff’s claim for the return of the lease deposit against C as to the instant building (the same as the claim based on the judgment of the Daejeon District Court 2015Gau543).

In order to preserve B, on February 12, 2015, the Daejeon District Court rendered a lawsuit against the Defendant seeking the cancellation of the title change agreement and the implementation of procedures for changing the name of the owner to C by means of service by public notice. The said court served the Defendant with a complaint by public notice.