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 reasons for the entry in this case by the court of first instance in this case are as follows: “U.S. District Court 2012Hahap233” in the third 1-2 of the judgment of the court of first instance is as “U.S. District Court 2012Hahap23,” and the defendant’s argument in the trial of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for addition of the following determination as to the defendant’s argument in the trial of the court of first instance

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. KRW 200 million deposited in the Defendant’s alleged C account is the Defendant’s marriage congratulatory money, which is the co-owned property of C and D, which is the mixed owner, and KRW 100 million among them is owned by D.

60 million won remitted to the defendant is paid at KRW 100 million owned by D and irrelevant to C, and at least KRW 30 million out of them is paid at least part of D’s equity and does not constitute fraudulent act.

B. In full view of the overall purport of the pleadings in the statement No. 3-4 and No. 4 of the evidence No. 3-4, the following facts can be acknowledged: (a) KRW 200 million was deposited in the account of the Defendant’s marriage on December 14, 2010, which was 17 days after the Defendant’s marriage; (b) KRW 100 million was deposited in the cashier’s checks; (c) C paid the credit card payment on a monthly basis thereafter; and (d) C withdrawn in cash; and (c) on June 2, 201, after six months from the Defendant’s marriage ceremony, C transferred the above account to the Defendant on June 2, 201.

In light of the above-mentioned method of deposit of KRW 200 million, the timing of remittance of KRW 60 million, and the fact that most of the congratulatory money would be appropriated for marriage expenses even if the defendant alleged in the defendant's assertion, it is reasonable to deem that the above KRW 200 million deposited in the account C is the property of KRW 3,000,000, which is known to C, and the donation by C to the defendant constitutes a fraudulent act.

The defendant's above assertion is not accepted.

3. The plaintiff's claim for conclusion is accepted within the extent of the above recognition, and the remaining claims are dismissed due to reasons, and the court of first instance.