1. Defendant B shall pay KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff at the rate of 20% per annum from May 4, 2014 to the date of complete payment.

1. Claim for loans to Defendant B

A. The indication of the claim: Defendant B’s claim for a loan (as of the date of lending the leased principal: KRW 20 million on March 9, 2010; KRW 40 million on April 9, 2010; KRW 20 million on October 13, 2010, which was written by the Plaintiff on June 26, 2012).

Service by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. Claim for revocation of fraudulent act against Defendant C

A. A. The summary of the parties’ assertion (1) around June 2010, Defendant B failed to repay to the Plaintiff the borrowed principal of KRW 60 million ( KRW 20 million on March 9, 2010, KRW 40 million on April 9, 2010) up to that time. In the course of divorce with Defendant C, while the name was registered under Defendant C’s name, in fact, the Plaintiff sold the instant real estate owned by the Defendants on June 12, 2010, and had Defendant C use the entire proceeds of the sale, thereby having the Defendant C give the donation or division of property as a way to de facto waive the share of KRW 1/2 on the said real estate.

As above, the share donation contract concluded between the Defendants on June 12, 2010 constitutes a fraudulent act by excessive division of property, and thus, until that time, the above donation contract is revoked within the limit of KRW 60 million, which is the Plaintiff’s loan claim, and seek compensation for the value against Defendant C.

(2) Since the instant real estate is the unique property of Defendant C, there was no donation of 1/2 shares of the instant real estate from Defendant B on June 12, 2010. As to the shares of 1/2 shares among the instant real estate, Defendant B has the right to share of 1/2 shares among the instant real estate.

Even if the sale price of the instant real estate was KRW 142 million, which is at least 1/200,000, out of the sales price of the instant real estate in KRW 243 million, was used to repay the obligation of collateral security against Defendant B’s national bank. As such, Defendant C cannot be deemed to have donated 1/2 shares out of the instant real estate from Defendant B.

B. (1) First, we examine the ownership relationship of the instant real estate.

Husband and wife under Article 830(1) of the Civil Act.