1. It was concluded on April 3, 2013 with respect to two-thirds of the shares of each real estate listed in the separate sheet between the defendant and B.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for the claim for reimbursement with the Seoul Central District Court No. 2013da506599 against B, C (B), and B (B; hereinafter referred to as “non-party company”).

The court shall provide "A" July 26, 2013.

As to Non-Party Company B, and C, jointly and severally KRW 63,805,415 and KRW 62,685,237;

B. The non-party company, B, etc. jointly and severally sentenced 130,025,430 won and 129,604,860 won among them, and the non-party company, B, etc., to pay damages for delay from August 3, 2012, respectively.

The above judgment was finalized on August 23, 2013.

B. On April 3, 2013, E: (a) owned each of the instant real estate on April 3, 2013, and died with B and F, the wife.

C. On the same day, the inheritors of E divided each of the instant real estate into the Defendant’s sole inheritance.

(hereinafter “instant division consultation”) D.

At the time of the E’s death, the establishment registration of a new mortgage was completed with each of the debtor E, mortgagee, G Bank, the maximum debt amount of KRW 195,600,000 (loan 163,000,000) and the maximum debt amount of KRW 96,00,000 (Loan 80,000) on the instant apartment. The establishment registration of a new mortgage was completed on the instant apartment building, with the debtor C, the Bank of Korea, the maximum debt amount of KRW 48,00,000 (Loan 40,000).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 to 3 evidence, Eul 6 evidence (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The fact that B was in excess of the debt at the time of the division consultation in this case’s insolvent is deemed to have been led to confession since the Defendant did not clearly dispute this.

3. Whether a fraudulent act is constituted

A. The plaintiff alleged by the parties that the waiver of the right to inherited property by B with the agreement on the division of inherited property constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, the instant agreement on division constitutes a fraudulent act.

As to this, the defendant's specific share of the property division result.