1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The counterclaim of the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) brought at the trial shall be dismissed.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation concerning this case are as follows: the court's explanation of this case is as follows: the "Non-Party F" in Part 4, Section 7, Section 7, of the first instance court's decision as "C"; the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the first instance court's decision, since it is the same as stated in the part of the first instance court's decision, Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The Defendant asserts that the instant lease agreement between the Plaintiff and C should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and therefore, we examine the legality of the lawsuit ex officio.

In the exercise of the 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 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 insufficient to say that the debtor merely knows that he/she committed a fraudulent act with the knowledge that he/she conducted a disposal act of the property, and it is necessary to inform the debtor of the fact that the juristic act is an act detrimental to the creditor, that it is not sufficient to fully satisfy the claim due to the lack of joint security of the claim or the lack of joint security already in the short situation, and that he/she had the intent to harm the debtor. Furthermore, it is difficult to presume that the debtor knew of the objective fact of the fraudulent act, and that the burden of proof as to the lapse

(See Supreme Court Decision 2004Da61280 Decided July 4, 2006, Supreme Court Decision 2009Da47852 Decided October 29, 2009, Supreme Court Decision 2013Da5855 Decided April 26, 2013, etc.). In light of the above legal principles, the registration of collateral security and provisional seizure of KRW 418,498,364, total sum of the real estate of this case at the time of entering into the instant lease agreement, shall be registered in full view of the health class, the facts recognized as above, the evidence No. 12, and the purport of the entire arguments as stated in the evidence No. 12 and evidence No. 1.