1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part on Defendant International Asset Trust Co., Ltd. shall be revoked, and the Plaintiff’s defendant.

1. The reasoning of this court is that the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing it as it is.

2. Whether the lawsuit against the defendant international asset trust is legitimate;

A. In this case, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in this case on June 30, 201, where the plaintiff had a duty to transfer the real estate of this case to the plaintiff pursuant to the Agreement Nos. 1 and 2 of this case, since the plaintiff entered into a trust agreement with the defendant international asset trust with respect to the real estate of this case, which is the only property, and the ownership transfer registration in the future of the defendant international asset trust, was insolvent, the above trust agreement constitutes a fraudulent act, as it harms the plaintiff who is the creditor of the defendant B, and thus, it constitutes a fraudulent act. Accordingly, the above trust agreement cancellation of the above trust agreement against the defendant Eul, together with the cancellation of the above trust agreement, sought implementation of the registration procedure for cancellation of the ownership transfer registration of this case as to the real estate of this case, within one year after the creditor becomes aware of the cause of cancellation. However, the plaintiff filed a lawsuit in this case on June 30, 2016, which was one year after being aware of the conclusion of the trust agreement as the fraudulent act.

B. According to Article 406(2) of the Civil Act, a creditor shall file a lawsuit for revocation of a creditor within one year from the date on which he/she becomes aware of the cause of revocation and within five years from the date of the juristic act.

In this case, the "date when the obligee becomes aware of the cause for revocation" means the date when the obligor becomes aware of the fact that the obligee had committed a fraudulent act despite being aware that it would prejudice the obligee, which is insufficient to simply recognize the fact that the obligor conducted a disposal of the property, and further, to know the existence of a specific fraudulent act.