1. The gift contract concluded on September 16, 2013 between the defendant and the non-party B with respect to the real estate indicated in the separate sheet is 4.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff entered into a credit card member agreement with B, and B used the card accordingly, and the principal of the card price that was not repaid by B until September 16, 2013 is KRW 4,303,969, and the fee is KRW 80,143.

B. On September 17, 2013, B performed the procedure for ownership transfer registration for the gift made on September 16, 2013 to the Defendant, who is his wife, on the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”).

C. At the time of the donation contract, the instant real estate was established with the right to collateral security (126,00,000 won for a national bank, a national bank, the maximum debt amount), and the maximum debt amount). However, on April 1, 2014, the Defendant completed the registration of change of the right to collateral security (hereinafter referred to as the “right to collateral security”) changing the obligor of the said right to collateral security

On September 23, 2015, the National Bank of the mortgagee filed an application for commencement of voluntary auction on the instant real estate with the Jung-gu District Court Goyang support C, and the auction procedure is in progress according to the decision.

[Grounds for Recognition] deemed confession (Article 150 (3) of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. According to the facts of the above recognition, the Plaintiff’s credit amounting to KRW 4,384,112 as of September 16, 2013, which was held by B as of September 16, 2013, concluded a donation contract between B and the Defendant on the instant real estate (i.e., the principal amounting to KRW 4,303,969, the number of KRW 80,143) is the preserved right of obligee’s right of revocation, and the Defendant’s donation of the instant real estate, which is the only property of the Plaintiff under the condition that B bears the obligation to the Plaintiff, constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the obligee

On the other hand, according to the facts acknowledged earlier as to the scope of revocation of fraudulent act, the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the defendant with respect to the real estate in this case was completed, and the defendant exempted the secured obligation of the right to collateral security established on the above real estate, and accordingly, this case.