1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. B, on June 14, 2002, borrowed KRW 2 million from the Hyundai Swiss Savings Bank Co., Ltd., but failed to repay the above loans from around the end of 2002.

B. On December 21, 201, Hyundai Swiss Savings Bank Co., Ltd. concluded an asset acquisition agreement with the Plaintiff and transferred the said claim to the Plaintiff, and notified B of the transfer of the claim.

As of June 11, 2015, the amount of the money that the Plaintiff received against B is the total amount of KRW 7,783,295.

C. B, as a result of the death of father C, jointly inherited the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) on the deceased’s inherited property, with other siblings. B entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property (1/5) with the Defendant’s sole ownership on June 19, 2013, and accordingly, the registration of ownership transfer was completed on September 3, 2013 with respect to the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, 6 and 7, and purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff asserts that the agreement on division of the inherited property of this case, which was made in excess of the debt of B, should be revoked since it constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the general creditors of B including the plaintiff.

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the claim against B was extinguished by the completion of the five-year commercial extinctive prescription, so the lawsuit of revocation of the fraudulent act in this case does not exist.

B. The persons who can invoke the statute of limitations are limited to those who are directly benefited from the extinction of rights. The beneficiary of the fraudulent act who becomes the other party to the revocation suit would lose the benefit obtained from the fraudulent act when the fraudulent act is revoked, but the creditor who exercises the right to claim the revocation of the fraudulent act.