1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing the instant case is that of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment as to the instant case, since it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance excluding adding or adding the following matters. Thus, it is citing this as is in accordance

2. The portion added or used in addition shall be from 8th to 20th of the same day from 8th day of the judgment of the court of first instance, with the following parts:

In addition to the testimony of the witness K’s trial, there is no objective evidence to acknowledge that K actually bears the construction cost of each real estate of this case. The following is added to the 9th page of the first instance judgment.

In the investigation procedure of the instant case in which Defendant C and L filed a complaint against E in fraud with respect to the loan of KRW 133,500,000,000, the following is added to the nine fourth (4) of the first instance judgment of “No. 9 of the first instance judgment in the following: (a) the Defendant C and L stated to the effect that each of the instant real estate actually owned by E were to be repaid with the money of Defendant C by setting aside the lease on a deposit basis, but failed to pay due to a provisional disposition.”

『㈑ 한편, 피고 회사, 피고 B는, 이 사건 각 부동산의 마무리 공사와 준공검사를 위해 피고 회사가 지출한 102,893,900원 비용채무를 대물변제 받고 피고 회사가 이 사건 각 부동산에 관한 E의 임차인들에 대한 임대차보증금 반환채무와 수리비 지급채무 합계 319,000,000원을 인수하는 대가로 E로부터 이 사건 각 부동산의 소유권을 이전받았는데, 이 사건 각 부동산의 가치가 396,000,000원(6세대 × 66,000,000원)에 불과하여 그 인수 및 대물변제 채무의 합계액 421,893,900원(102,893,900원 319,000,000원 보다 작기 때문에 이 사건 각 부동산의 양도가 다른 일반채권자들을 해할 목적으로 현저히 낮은 가격에 이루어졌다고 볼 수...