1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the underlying facts is the same as the corresponding part of the two to three pages of the judgment of the court of first instance (the facts recognized as 1.). Thus, it is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 4

(However, first of all, we examine whether the instant transfer contract, which was sought by the Plaintiff on the ground that each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet was a fraudulent act, constituted a subordinate property of west Jin's responsibility and belongs to the common obligees' joint security.

A. Facts of recognition 1) Land and Transport Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Land and Transport Construction”).

) The owner of the instant land is the owner of the instant land, and E.S. co-ownership Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “S. co-ownership”) around April 208.

(2) On April 30, 2008, when concluding a contract on aggregate development with respect to aggregate buried in the above land, the contract deposit was set at KRW 400 million, and the contract period was from April 27, 2008 to January 29, 2010. 2) On the ground that the construction of earth and sand offered security equivalent to an amount equivalent to 130% of the contract deposit paid by Ego for the construction of earth and sand, which was set at KRW 400 million to the public.

3) On April 3, 2009, Tho Lake Construction Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Choho Lake”)

(4) On April 6, 2009, the Plaintiff sold one parcel, other than the instant land, in the purchase price of KRW 4.7 billion, and the down payment of KRW 7.5 billion, the remainder KRW 3.995 billion, at the time of concluding a contract, shall be paid within 60 days, and the contract deposit of KRW 400 million, which was paid by E.S. public, shall be deducted from the down payment.

5) E.S. Public official: (a) on October 8, 2008, the trade name of E.S. Co., Ltd. is “C. C. C. C. Co., Ltd.’ (hereinafter “C. C

(3) On December 30, 201, the Plaintiff changed its trade name to “stock company” and merged with the third industry on December 30, 2011. [In the absence of any dispute over the grounds for recognition, the Plaintiff changed the trade name to “stock company S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. S. 1,