The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

After compiling the adopted evidence, the lower court acknowledged the facts as indicated in its reasoning, and determined that B’s selling the instant real estate, which is one of its sole property, to the Defendant, constitutes a fraudulent act committed with the intent of undermining the Plaintiff

Furthermore, the lower court concluded a sales contract for the instant real estate between E and B, which received payment in lieu of the instant real estate from a dialogue Construction Co., Ltd.

Considering that a title trust agreement cannot be deemed to have existed or that the registration for transfer of ownership completed under the name of the Defendant was cancelled, the Defendant rejected all the Defendant’s assertion disputing the establishment of fraudulent act on the grounds that the registration for transfer of ownership completed under the name of the Defendant was not by fraudulent act but by fraudulent act, or that the registration under the name B is null and void pursuant to the main sentence of Article 4(2) of the Act on the Registration of Real Estate under Actual

The judgment below

Examining the reasoning in light of the relevant legal principles and records, the judgment of the court below is just and acceptable, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or incomplete hearing as alleged in the grounds of appeal

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.