1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is based on the judgment of the court of first instance No. 2-B.

The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of paragraph (1) below as follows. Thus, it shall be cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of

2. Inasmuch as the Defendant, at the time of concluding the instant sales contract, did not know that the Defendant’s act constituted a fraudulent act, he/she himself/herself is a bona fide beneficiary. As such, in a lawsuit seeking revocation of fraudulent act, the beneficiary is presumed to be acting in good faith, and thus, in order to be exempted from his/her responsibility, he/she is responsible for proving his/her good faith. In such cases, whether the beneficiary was bona fide or not shall be determined in light of logical rules, comprehensively taking into account the following: (a) the relationship between the debtor and the beneficiary; (b) the details and motive leading up to the act of disposal between the debtor and the beneficiary; (c) whether there are any special circumstances to doubt that the terms and conditions of the act of disposal are normal transaction; and (d) whether there are objective materials to support the act of disposal; and (e) the circumstances after the act of disposal, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2007Da74621, Jul. 10, 2008; 2015Da31315.