1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3.Paragraph 2 of the text of the judgment of the court of first instance.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as follows, except where the defendant added to the pertinent part the following determination as to the matters alleged in the trial of the court of first instance, and thus, this is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Additional matters to be determined;

A. The summary of the defendant's assertion was that on December 27, 2001, before C borrowed money from D, the defendant lent 50 million won to C on December 27, 2001. Since C transferred its inheritance shares on the real estate stated in the separate sheet to the defendant for repayment of the above loan, it is not a fraudulent act, but there was no intention to harm the defendant.

B. Determination 1) Only on the part of the statements in evidence Nos. 8 through 12 as to a fraudulent act, it is insufficient to recognize the fact that the defendant lent 50 million won to C on December 27, 2001 to have a loan claim equivalent to the amount, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge otherwise. Furthermore, even if the defendant had a loan claim against C, as the defendant alleged above, if the debtor's assets are insufficient to repay the whole amount of the debt, if the debtor provided the debtor's assets to a certain creditor as payment in substitutes or a security, then it would be prejudicial to the interests of other creditors, unless there are special circumstances, and thus, it would be the same as if the debtor's assets offered as payment in kind or a security are not the debtor's assets, or less than the debtor's assets are less than the debtor's claims (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da85161, Sep. 10, 2009; and C's act of transferring the above assets to the debtor's assets in excess of the inheritance shares.