1. As to KRW 43,011,980 and KRW 42,367,974 among the Plaintiff, Defendant A’s year from November 30, 2019 to February 18, 2020.

1. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant A

(a) Indication of claims: as emitted from the cause of the claims against the defendant A; and

B. Judgment by publication (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act). 2. Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B

A. On September 2019, when Defendant A had been liable to pay the principal and interest of the apartment of this case against the Plaintiff, Defendant B entered into a sales contract with Defendant B on the instant apartment of this case. In this case, there is room to deem that the act of completing the registration of ownership transfer pursuant to the above, as to the instant apartment of this case, would have satisfied the objective requirements of fraudulent act in relation to the Plaintiff, who is the obligee of Defendant A, the obligee of the Plaintiff. In addition to the purport of the entire pleadings as well as the witness’s testimony, Defendant B was the so-called “ bona fide beneficiary” at the time of concluding the above sales contract with respect to the instant apartment of this case.

B. Ultimately, Defendant B’s assertion against this point is justifiable, and thus, the Plaintiff’s revocation of the instant fraudulent act against Defendant B and the subsequent claim for restitution cannot be accepted.

3. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s claim for the reimbursement of the principal and interest of the instant claim against Defendant A seeking the fulfillment of the duty acknowledged as above is accepted, but all of the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant B against the Defendant cannot be accepted.