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 why the court should explain this part of the basic facts are to dismiss “Defendant A” as “Defendant”;

(b) by striking paragraphs (c).

Inasmuch as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except in cases where the number of ports below is lowered by one step, it shall be quoted by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Whether the fraudulent act is constituted;

A. The agreement on the division of inherited property to determine the cause of a claim is to confirm the reversion of inherited property by having all or part of the inherited property provisionally owned by each inheritor as the sole ownership by each inheritor or as a new co-ownership relationship with respect to the inherited property, and thus, it is a legal act aimed at property rights in its nature. Therefore, a fraudulent act may be exercised against the creditor, barring any special circumstance. Meanwhile, barring any special circumstance, the debtor's act of selling real property only with respect to one's own property and changing it into money easily for consumption or transferring it to another person without compensation is a fraudulent act against the creditor. Thus, even if the debtor in excess of his/her obligation has reduced joint security against the creditor by giving up his/her right to the inherited property

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da73765 Decided March 13, 2008, and Supreme Court Decision 2007Da29119 Decided July 26, 2007). According to the above facts, B transferred 2/9 shares equivalent to the statutory inheritance among the real estate of this case, which is one’s sole property, to the defendant without any consideration through the agreement on the division of inherited property of this case. Thus, the agreement on the division of inherited property of this case constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the plaintiff, who is the creditor, unless there are special circumstances.

B. The Defendant knows that B bears the obligation against the Plaintiff, as to the Defendant’s argument of the first good faith.