1. The plaintiff's primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is a creditor against C, and the Defendant was the husband and wife of C, and C has donated cash over several times to the Defendant under excess of the obligation owed to the Plaintiff. Of which, the Plaintiff, on January 8, 2014, revoked the gift contract with respect to KRW 88 million that C donated to the Defendant on January 8, 2014 by exercising the right to revoke the fraudulent act, and filed a claim for restitution.

B. The fact that C, on January 8, 2014, remitted money of KRW 88 million to the Defendant’s deposit account (Dong Daegu Agricultural Cooperatives E) from his/her own deposit account (Donggu Daegu Agricultural Cooperatives D) is not a dispute between the parties.

그런데 피고는 원고가 사해행위로 특정한 금융거래금 8,800만 원은 당시 신용상의 문제로 통장거래가 어려웠던 C가 자신의 사업을 위해 FGH으로부터 투자받아 2014. 1. 8. 피고의 농협은행 계좌로 입금한 돈으로, 이후 C의 요구로 C의 사업을 위하여 사용되었을 뿐 피고가 증여받은 돈이 아니라고 주장하는바, 을 제2, 5, 6, 7호증의 각 기재와 변론 전체의 취지에 의하면, 피고가 ㉠ 2014. 1. 9. 투자자 F에게 2,250만원을 송금하고, ㉡ 2014. 1. 10. I에 부가가치세 잔금으로 250만원을 송금하고, ㉢ 2014. 1. 10.에 투자자 G(딸 J)에게 2,816만원을 송금하고, ㉣ 2014. 1. 11.에 투자자 H에게 4,952만원을 송금하였으며, 그밖에 C가 피고에게 송금하였던 다른 돈도 C가 운영하던 사업과 관련하여 송금된 사실을 인정할 수 있는바, 그렇다면 원고가 제출하는 증거만으로 C가 피고에게 돈을 증여하였다고 인정하기 부족하다.

Therefore, it is difficult to accept the Plaintiff’s primary claim based on the premise that a gift contract was concluded between C and the Defendant.

2. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion is known to the debtor with the knowledge of the existence of the creditor against the debtor and the infringement of the claim.