1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part is revoked.

1. The reasoning of the judgment in this part of the basic facts is the same as that of “1. Basic Facts” in the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, they are cited.

However, paragraphs (f) and (c) of this paragraph shall be followed as follows:

F. Meanwhile, on October 19, 2007, B entered into a land trust agreement with a land trust company (hereinafter “large land trust”) on the part of exclusive ownership (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) among the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1 through No. 3 on October 19, 2007, and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to each real estate of this case as a trustee on October 22, 2007.

(g) On August 31, 2012, the registration of a site right was completed. The Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit against the Korea Land Trust on September 25, 2012, claiming that the instant trust agreement was a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, the creditor, and that the said trust agreement was a fraudulent act.

However, on December 28, 2012, the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea Land Trust and the Korea

As a trustee of land trust on the basis of the above contract has been terminated, the land trust acquired the status of the lawsuit in this case of the land trust with respect to the real estate trust.

After that, on January 9, 2015, the first and the second real estate trust entered into a contract to change the trustee under the instant trust agreement to the defendant, and upon the termination of the duties of the first and second real estate trust as the trustee under the said contract, the defendant taken over the status of the second and second real estate trust in this case.

2. The reasoning of the judgment on this part of the judgment on the instant safety defense is that it is identical to the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing it as it is.

3. Judgment on the merits

(a) preserved claims 1.