1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. The scope of trial in this Court is to confirm the existence of a principal claim and seek revocation of a fraudulent act as a preliminary claim (2015Na2074693). In addition, the Plaintiff seeks revision of the distribution schedule by filing a claim of demurrer against a distribution combined with the main claim.

[Case 2015Na2074709] The court of first instance rejected the part of the claim for the confirmation of the existence of the obligation above as the primary claimant, and accepted the claim for the said joint claimant's objection. On the other hand, with respect to the claim for the revocation of the fraudulent act above as the conjunctive claimant, the court did not further decide on the ground that " insofar as there was no obligation based on the notarial deed stated in the Defendant's claim in the part of the claim for the objection that the plaintiff seeks together with the confirmation of the existence of the obligation, it is unnecessary to determine the conjunctive claim in preparation for the case where the plaintiff's assertion

As to this, only the Defendant lost the part of the claim of demurrer against distribution, and the Plaintiff did not file an appeal separately.

As a result, the above claim for the confirmation of existence of the primary obligation and the claim for the revocation of the conjunctive fraudulent act were judged in this court along with the above claim for the objection to the distribution in the concurrent relation, but the nature of the consolidation relation was excluded from the object of the judgment of this court as it is simple combination.

Therefore, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the claim of objection against the distribution filed by the defendant.

2. The reasoning for the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the following modifications among the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Revision] The same part as the second part of the first instance judgment

F. The 13th day of the month refers to January 13, 2010.

No. 8 of the judgment of the first instance court is written without any document, such as the 10th letter of understanding.