1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. Plaintiff A’s children are Plaintiff B’s children, and the network D (hereinafter “the deceased”) are the sames of Plaintiff B, and the Defendant is the cooperation with the deceased.

B. On February 1, 2016, the Deceased entered into a sales contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with the content that each of the instant real estate listed in the separate sheet (the instant real estate was divided into each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet on March 13, 2015, regardless of whether it was before or after the division; hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) was sold to the Defendant for a price of KRW 70 million (hereinafter “the instant sales contract”). On the same day, each of the instant real estate was completed on the grounds of the instant sales contract for each of the instant real estate in the future of the Defendant.

C. At the time of the instant sales contract, each of the instant real estate was completed on February 3, 2016, when the establishment registration of the first and second priority collective security (hereinafter the above first priority collective security (hereinafter referred to as “first priority security”) was completed in the name of each Jeju bank, and the second priority collective security (hereinafter referred to as “second priority collective security”) was revoked on February 3, 2016, which was subsequent to the instant sales contract.

The Deceased died on February 11, 2016.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1, 3, Eul evidence 1 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. With respect to the Deceased’s summary of the cause of the claim, the Plaintiff A had each claim for loans of KRW 90 million, and KRW 70 million, respectively. However, even though the Deceased knew that he would harm the Plaintiffs in excess of his obligation, the Deceased concluded the instant sales contract with the Defendant, who had been able to do so, regarding each of the instant real estate, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the future of the Defendant.

Therefore, the sales contract of this case is an intentional act that causes damage to the plaintiffs' respective loans claims against the deceased. Thus, the cancellation of the sales contract of this case and its restoration to the original state of each real estate of this case.