1. As to shares 2/11 of each real estate listed in the separate sheet:

(a) was concluded on April 27, 2016 between B and the Defendant.

In fact, B entered into a loan agreement with Korea Standards Bank on August 5, 2008 with credit card holders. On August 31, 2012, B borrowed KRW 4,500,000 from the said bank at the loan rate of 36 months and interest rate of 28%.

B In arrears with the above loans and credit card bills, the above bank transferred the above loans and credit card bills to the Plaintiff on September 10, 2013, and notified the transfer to B.

The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B with the Seoul Northern District Court No. 2014Gapo236588, May 28, 2014 that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff 7,268,94 won and 3,794,159 won among them, 18% per annum from November 1, 2013 to May 16, 2014; and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment to the day of full payment, 20% per annum from November 1, 2013 to the day of full payment.” The above judgment became final and conclusive at that time.

B’s father C died on January 21, 2014, and the Defendant and his children, who are his spouse, jointly inherited the network C’s property.

On April 27, 2014, the Defendant, B, D, E, and F, who are co-inheritorss of the network C, made an agreement on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant agreement on the division of inherited property”) solely inherited by the Defendant as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by the network C (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”). Accordingly, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer based on the agreement on the division of inherited property on April 28, 2016 as to each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

【The grounds for recognition】 According to the above facts as to the entries in the evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 (including the number of branches), and the existence of the right to receive preservation as a whole, the Plaintiff’s claim against B against whom the right to receive preservation was determined as to the whole purport of the pleading, it constitutes a preserved claim for the obligee’s right of revocation arising prior to the consultation

Fraudulent act.