1. On March 23, 2014, the Defendant and Nonparty B concluded on March 23, 2014 with respect to 2/13 shares of the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. Nonparty B entered into a loan transaction agreement with Samsung Card Co., Ltd., and did not repay the loan to the above Samsung Card Co., Ltd.

B. The Samsung Card Co., Ltd. transferred the above bonds to Solomon Savings Bank on May 3, 2006, and notified this to the above B.

C. Solomon Savings Bank applied for payment order against the above B as Seoul Central District Court 2010 tea62772, and received the above payment order from the above court, and the payment order became final and conclusive around that time.

On April 26, 2011, Solomon Savings Bank Co., Ltd. transferred the above bonds to the Plaintiff, and notified the above fact to B.

E. However, following the death of the deceased Party B’s father, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer as the receipt No. 8894 on June 18, 2014 with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), which was owned by the husband C, on March 23, 2014.

The original net C's shares in B on the inherited property are 2/13.

F. The amount that was not paid to the Plaintiff as of September 1, 2014 is the principal amount of KRW 2,017,368, interest, delay damages, etc. of KRW 14,01,181, and is equivalent to KRW 16,028,549 in total.

G. The above B is an insolvent person who does not hold any specific property at the time of the above consultation division or the date of the closing of argument.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 5, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the establishment of fraudulent act

A. (1) The plaintiff's assertion (the plaintiff's assertion) was made by the non-party B and the defendant through a division consultation on inherited property on the inheritance shares of this case concerning the real estate B, thereby having the defendant acquire all of the shares.

Therefore, the above agreement on division of property should be revoked as a fraudulent act.

Dor the defendant's argument B succeeds to the inheritance.