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 reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the defendant added the following "2. Additional determination" as to the new argument at the court of first instance, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 42

2. Additional determination

A. The defendant alleged that B worked as a nurse at the Seoul National University Hospital, and currently worked as the head of the department in G, a corporation with a certain amount of 3 million won per month, and it is not insolvent. However, as of the time of the fraudulent act, the "unlawful act" subject to the creditor's right of revocation under Article 406 of the Civil Act refers to an act detrimental to the creditor by "in excess of the debtor's obligation by reducing active property or increasing the negative property, or by deepening the debtor's status in excess of his/her obligation," as at the time of the fraudulent act, and it cannot be said that the debtor's obligation does not exceed his/her obligation solely on the ground that the debtor alleged by the defendant has certain monthly income. Therefore,

B. In addition, the defendant, prior to the establishment of the plaintiff's claim, was lent money to B, and thus the defendant can claim priority over the plaintiff, and therefore the plaintiff cannot exercise the right to revoke the fraudulent act against such defendant. However, the plaintiff's claim that is not the right to revoke the fraudulent act, but the validity of the claim is equal.

Therefore, the defendant's above assertion cannot be accepted in this case where there is no evidence that the defendant's claim is a secured right claim or a right to preferential payment.

3. In conclusion, the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.