1. All appeals filed by Defendant (Appointed Party) B and Defendant C are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Appointed Party) B.

1. Objects to be adjudicated by this Court;

A. The following facts are based on the subject of the Plaintiff’s fraudulent act.

(1) On October 7, 2016, the registration of initial ownership was completed in 1/2 shares in relation to the instant building under D and K name (hereinafter the term “instant building”) based on the first instance judgment.

With respect to the share 1/2 of D and the share 1/2 of K on the same day, ① the establishment of the first collateral security right of KRW 900 million to Defendant C, whereas the second collateral security right of KRW 2 billion to Defendant B was established, ② the establishment of the second collateral security right of KRW 2 billion to the maximum debt amount, ③ the provisional registration of this case was established based on the promise to trade of

(2) On January 19, 2017, the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage No. 1 was established on January 13, 2017: (a) the additional registration of the instant transfer of KRW 78,000,000 to E Co., Ltd. on the ground of a partial transfer of a final claim; and (b) the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage No. 2 was established on January 13, 2017 to F, who was appointed on the ground of a partial transfer of a final claim.

B. Of the instant building, the Plaintiff claimed revocation and restitution of the instant claim by asserting that: (a) the instant agreement on the first mortgage between D and the Defendant C on the share of D 1/2; (b) the instant agreement on the second mortgage between D and the Defendant B; (c) the promise on the instant transaction between D and the Defendant B; (d) the partial transfer contract between the Defendant C and the appointed party E; and (e) the partial transfer contract between the Defendant B and the appointed party F was a fraudulent act; and (b) the Defendant B, E, and F selected the Defendant B as the appointed party and responded to the Plaintiff’s claim.

C. The first instance court rejected the lawsuit seeking revocation on the ground that the contract for partial transfer of confirmed bonds and the contract for partial transfer of confirmed bonds are legal acts between the beneficiary and subsequent purchaser, not subject to revocation of fraudulent act.

In addition, the first instance court concerning D 1/2 shares among the buildings of this case.