1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On February 27, 2013, the Plaintiff entered into a credit card subscription agreement with B to pay damages for delay applying the overdue interest rate pursuant to the Plaintiff’s individual member agreement, where B uses the credit card issued by the Plaintiff, and B pays each month the credit card price used by the end of the preceding month, and where the payment is not made by the settlement date.

B. B does not pay the above card use amount from March 10, 2014.

C. Meanwhile, on October 4, 2013, B donated each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) (hereinafter “instant gift agreement”) to the Defendant, who is the wife, on the other hand, on October 4, 2013, and attached month.

8. Daegu District Court completed the registration of transfer of ownership under No. 51090. D.

On November 18, 2013, the defendant reported divorce with B.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion asserts that, around October 2013, B was a donation to the Defendant of the instant real estate, which is one of its sole property, by presumption that B would not pay the Plaintiff the use of the card, and that this constitutes a fraudulent act in collusion between the Defendant and B, and accordingly, the instant donation contract between B and the Defendant should be revoked.

B. As to the defendant's assertion, the defendant asserts that the real estate of this case was donated to the defendant as division of property and consolation money, while the real estate of this case was separated by agreement with B, and thus, it does not constitute a fraudulent act.

3. Determination

A. Division of property following divorce is a system that has the nature of support to the other party in view of the liquidation of common property formed through mutual cooperation between the parties during marriage. In light of the fact that the debtor who has already been in excess of his/her obligation has the nature of support to the other party, while divorced.