1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as stated in the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the defendant adds to the following paragraph (2), and thus, it is identical to the part of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the conjunctive claim. As such, it shall be cited as it is pursuant to the main sentence

2. The addition;

A. The summary of the Defendant’s assertion is different from all indirect facts that the first instance court’s judgment rejected the Defendant’s bona fide defense.

Rather, while the Defendant, a debtor, C and the beneficiary, were unaware of each other, the instant transaction contract was concluded through the introduction by the J, a real estate developer, and the details and circumstances leading to the transaction act between a debtor and a beneficiary, there are no extenuating circumstances to doubt that the details and circumstances leading to the transaction act between the debtor and the beneficiary are normal and there are no objective data to support the transaction relationship. In light of the logical and empirical rules, it is clear that the Defendant is a bona fide beneficiary when determining it reasonably in light of the overall circumstances, including

B. In a lawsuit seeking revocation of a fraudulent act, the beneficiary has the responsibility to prove himself/herself that he/she was unaware of the fraudulent act.

In this case, objective and acceptable evidence should be supported if the beneficiary was bona fide at the time of the fraudulent act, and it should not be readily concluded that the beneficiary was bona fide at the time of the fraudulent act only with the debtor's unilateral statement or a statement that is merely a third party's abstract statement.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da60466, Jul. 22, 2010; Supreme Court Decision 2012Da202932, Dec. 23, 2015). In the instant case, the Defendant asserted that he/she was in good faith and that he/she was in good faith, and based on that assertion, the Defendant’s statement, the content of conversation between the Defendant and the J or I, the Defendant’s legal representative and the J or the Defendant.