1. It was concluded on May 17, 201 with respect to the real estate listed in paragraph 1 of the attached list between the Defendant and B.

1. As the lawsuit in this case, the Plaintiff asserted that the establishment of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “instant right to collateral security”) on the land listed in paragraph (1) of the [Attachment List No. B (hereinafter “instant land”) was fraudulent and sought revocation of the instant right to collateral security and correction of the amount of distribution due to restitution to its original state against the Defendant by asserting that the establishment of the right to collateral security (hereinafter “right to collateral security”) on the land listed in paragraph (1) of the [Attachment List No. 1] was made against the Defendant. On January 13, 2014, the Defendant knew that the Plaintiff’s act of creating the instant right to collateral security constituted a fraudulent act, and that the instant lawsuit filed after the lapse of one year, was an unlawful lawsuit even with the exclusion period.

However, in the exercise of the creditor's right of revocation, the "date when the creditor becomes aware of the cause for revocation" means the date when the creditor becomes aware of the requirements for the creditor's right of revocation, that is, the date when the creditor becomes aware of the fact that the debtor committed a fraudulent act with the knowledge that he would prejudice the creditor. Thus, it is not sufficient that the debtor merely knew of the fact that the debtor conducted a disposal act of the property, and it is necessary to inform the debtor of the fact that the juristic act was insufficient to fully satisfy the claim due to the lack of joint security of the claim or lack of joint security in the situation where the creditor would harm the creditor, and further, it is necessary to inform the debtor of the fact that the debtor had known of the intention to harm the creditor. It cannot be presumed that the creditor knew of the objective fact of the fraudulent act, and the burden of proof as to the lapse of the limitation period has the burden

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da5855, Apr. 26, 2013). The Plaintiff was aware of the fact that the instant right to collateral security was created around January 13, 2014 when the Plaintiff was forced to commence compulsory sale of the instant land.