1. With respect to the forest land of 4264 square meters in Chungcheongnam-gun Hongsung-gun:

A. A sales contract concluded on May 30, 2016 between the Defendant and D is concluded.

1. On May 31, 2012, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 40 million to E, and D drafted a notarial deed stating that “The Plaintiff shall lend KRW 40 million to D on May 31, 2012, and D shall repay the said amount to the Plaintiff on May 31, 2016” (hereinafter referred to as “instant notarial deed”) in order to secure a joint and several surety for the obligation of borrowing funds to the Plaintiff.

D은 채무초과 상태에서 2016. 5. 30. 처남댁인 피고와 유일한 재산인 충남 홍성군 C 임야 4264㎡(이하 ‘이 사건 부동산’이라 한다)에 관하여 매매계약을 체결하고(이하 ‘이 사건 매매계약’이라 한다), 2016. 5. 31. 피고에게 이 사건 부동산에 관하여 주문 제1의 나항 기재와 같은 소유권이전등기를 마쳐주었다

(hereinafter “this case’s transfer registration”). [Grounds for recognition] The fact that no dispute exists, Gap 1, 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings.

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff’s joint and several liability claim against D was already incurred prior to the conclusion of the instant sales contract, and thus, the obligee’s right of revocation can be the preserved claim of this case. 2) The Defendant asserts as follows.

E entered into a partnership agreement with the plaintiff and his wife F to purchase and resell multi-household housing around 2007, and accordingly, E has a claim for return of investment amounting to at least 40 million won against the plaintiff and F.

The defendant set off against the plaintiff's joint and several liability claim against D by making the above investment deposit refund claim as the automatic bond. Since the amount of the automatic bond is more than the amount of the passive bond, the plaintiff's joint and several liability claim against D was eventually extinguished. If the plaintiff's investment deposit return claim against E and F cannot be set off against the automatic bond, it constitutes an abuse of rights.

Therefore, the obligee’s right of revocation in this case.