1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. 7/10 of the real estate stated in the separate sheet between the defendant and C.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 16, 2016, the Plaintiff entered into a loan agreement with C on general household loan agreement (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”) with C on a loan limit of KRW 50,000,000, and until March 16, 2018 when the loan period expires, with interest rate of KRW 2.05% (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”).

B. C began to delay the payment of principal and interest under the instant loan agreement from October 26, 2017, and as of November 19, 2017, the Plaintiff’s amount of claims under the instant loan agreement was KRW 50,569,303 in total.

C. On March 7, 2005, C/C owned 7/10 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”), and the Defendant, the spouse of C, together owned 3/10 of the ownership transfer registration. Since C/C concluded a donation agreement with the Defendant on March 23, 2016 on the instant real estate for share ownership transfer (hereinafter “the instant donation agreement”), and on the same day, “the ownership transfer registration under the name of the Defendant is the instant ownership transfer registration.”

D) The Defendant sold the instant real estate to H and I on November 11, 2017, and completed the registration of ownership transfer in the H and I’s name on November 24, 2017. [Grounds for recognition] There is no dispute, A’s entry in items 1 through 5 (if a number is available, the number is included) and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion of this case’s gift contract should be revoked within the limit of KRW 50,569,303, which is the Plaintiff’s claim amount, due to a fraudulent act prejudicial to C’s creditor, and the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff 50,569,303 won and interest in arrears with the value compensation.

B. The Defendant’s assertion 1) At the time of the conclusion of the instant gift contract, C did not have any obligation to pay debts. 2) Even if the instant gift contract constitutes a fraudulent act, the Plaintiff’s revocation against the Defendant, a bona fide beneficiary.