1. As to shares 2/11 of the real estate listed in the Schedule,

A. On July 21, 2015, between B and the Defendant.

1. On January 23, 2015, the basic facts C died after having left D, B, E, and F, the Defendant and his/her children, who are the wife.

B On July 21, 2015, when the Plaintiff did not have any particular property and was in excess of his/her obligation due to transfer money, etc., on July 21, 2015, the Defendant and other inheritors, including the Defendant, and the inherited property, agreed on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant division agreement”) to be owned by the Defendant solely, and accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real property was completed on July 27, 2015 due to the said division.

【Ground for recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, and each description of Gap 1-8 (including virtual number)

2. Determination

A. Determination on the cause of a claim 1) In principle, even in a case where a debtor in excess of his/her obligation gives up his/her right to inherited property while holding a divided agreement on inherited property, and thus a joint security against the general creditor has been reduced, it constitutes a fraudulent act against the creditor (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da29119, Jul. 26, 2007). Meanwhile, barring any special circumstance, the debtor’s transfer of real estate, which is one of his/her sole property, to another person without compensation, constitutes a fraudulent act against the creditor, and thus, the debtor’s intent to commit fraud is presumed and the burden of proving that the transferor did not have bad faith (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da41875, Apr. 24, 2001) is the beneficiary (see, e., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da41875, Apr. 24, 2001).

Therefore, this case.