1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except where Defendant C added the following judgments as to the newly asserted content by this court, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional determination

A. On February 6, 2014, the day following the preparation of the instant loan certificate, Defendant C, upon requesting a certified judicial scrivener to apply for provisional seizure of the instant real estate on the same day, was aware of the fact that Defendant C entered into the instant donation contract with the intent to impair the Plaintiff by receiving a certified judicial scrivener’s copy of the register on the instant real estate on the same day.

Nevertheless, on November 2, 2018, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Defendant C for the revocation of a fraudulent act. The part on the claim for revocation of a fraudulent act among the lawsuits in this case is unlawful as it was filed after the exclusion period expires.

B. In the exercise of the obligee’s right of revocation, “the date when the obligee became aware of the cause for the revocation” means the date when the obligee became aware of the requirement for the obligee’s right of revocation, that is, the date when the obligor became aware that it would prejudice the obligee.

In order to do this, it is not sufficient that the debtor simply stated that he/she conducted an act of disposal of property, and it is also required to know the existence of a specific fraudulent act and to know the fact that he/she had an intent to injure the debtor.

If the objective facts of the fraudulent act were known, it cannot be presumed that the reason for revocation was known, and the burden of proof as to the lapse of the limitation period lies on the other party to the lawsuit for revocation of the fraudulent act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2016Da272311 Decided April 10, 2018). C.

Judgment

If evidence No. 8-2 and No. 1-4 are added to the purport of the entire pleadings, the Plaintiff’s real estate of this case to a certified judicial scrivener on February 6, 2014.