1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

With respect to the vessels listed in the separate sheet between B and the Defendant, as to the vessels listed in the separate sheet.

1. Grounds for a judgment of this court which cited the judgment of the first instance, and "Article 2-2" in the judgment of the first instance;

D. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment, except for the part below below, which was less than 2 of the establishment of the fraudulent act and the intention of causing death (as set forth in No. 8, No. 2). Thus, this shall be cited by the main sentence of Article 420

[2] The plaintiff held the loan principal of 200,000,000 won and damages for delay against B. The sale of the ship of this case, which is the only property in excess of the above debts like B, constitutes a fraudulent act in relation to the plaintiff (Article 44(1) of the Fisheries Act, the defendant shall succeed to the status of the previous fishery permit holder as well as the ship itself). In this case, the defendant is presumed to be the beneficiary in bad faith (the defendant is presumed to be "B's property status at the time of the contract of this case" and there was no specific assertion and proof as to the circumstance proving his own good faith. (B) The defendant is not entitled to 981,00 won as to the ship of this case as at the time of the contract of this case, and if the contract of this case was established in excess of 516,709,000 won, which is the value of the ship of this case as at the time of the contract of this case, and the remaining amount of the secured claim of this case is not subject to the claim of this case.