Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the defendant shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim against the above cancellation shall be dismissed.

1. The basic facts;

2. The reasoning of the judgment of the court concerning the defense prior to the merits is the same as that of the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, it shall be cited by applying the main text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. Since the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of goods against C was established before the contract to establish a mortgage was concluded, the act in question becomes a preserved claim in the lawsuit seeking the revocation of the act in question (the Defendant asserts that the Plaintiff’s claim for the price of the goods has expired, but as long as the claim for the price of the goods was established before the contract to establish a mortgage, the maturity of the due date does not affect the nature of the claim to be preserved in the lawsuit seeking the revocation of the fraudulent act). B. Whether the act in question constitutes an act of deception 1) If a security right has been established on the object transferred by the obligor of the relevant legal doctrine, the liability property offered to the general creditors’ joint security among the said object is limited to the remainder after deducting the amount of the secured claim. If the amount of the secured claim exceeds the price of the object, the transfer of the object cannot be deemed as an act of deception 200 (see Supreme Court Decision 200Da10864, Sept. 9, 1997). 208, which is set up the remainder of the obligor’s claim for joint collateral security establishment.