1. On March 7, 2017, concerning shares in 2/9 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet between the Defendant and B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff filed an application against B for a payment order with the Suwon District Court No. 2012 tea2693, which stated that “B shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 11,562,203 and the amount of KRW 11,163,958 calculated at the rate of 29.9% per annum from March 9, 2012 to the date of full payment,” and the said payment order was finalized on March 31, 2012.

B. C, the father of B (hereinafter “the deceased”), died on November 16, 2016, and the inherited property was jointly inherited by the Defendant (3/9), the wife, B, D (2/9 respectively), and E and F, the inheritor of the wife.

C. On March 7, 2017, the deceased’s heir made an agreement on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant division agreement”) with the purport to vest the real estate indicated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), which is the inherited property of the deceased, in the Defendant.

According to the instant partition agreement, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on April 5, 2017 with respect to the instant real estate due to inheritance due to a division made by consultation on November 16, 2016.

E. At the time of the instant partition consultation, B had no other assets except the inheritance shares on the instant real estate, and was insolvent.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 1 to 7, Eul evidence 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The establishment of a fraudulent act and the agreement on division of inherited property under the beneficiary's bad faith (1) is a juristic act with respect to the inherited property which was provisionally owned by co-inheritors upon commencement of inheritance as a sole ownership of each inheritor, or as a juristic act with respect to which the reversion of inherited property is final by performing as a new co-inheritors, and therefore, it can be subject to the exercise of the right to revoke a fraudulent act.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000Da51797, Feb. 9, 2001). The debtor sells real estate, which is the sole property of the debtor.