1. The Defendants and G cancel each gift agreement entered into on August 4, 2013 between the Defendants and G.

2. The plaintiff, .

1. Basic facts

A. G’s transfer of the instant sales right to G sold the H land sales right (hereinafter “instant sales right”) to Sung Building Co., Ltd. at KRW 5,030,000,000 on June 26, 2013.

G The same year from June 26, 2013

7. From the date of May, 15, the company received KRW 1,994,924,400 out of the purchase price.

B. The Plaintiff’s disposition imposing transfer tax on G (1) did not report and pay the transfer income tax on the instant sales right on January 27, 2014. On or around August 7, 2014, the Plaintiff notified that G should pay KRW 851,479,830, including transfer income tax, by revising the reported details of G around August 7, 2014.

(2) As of April 11, 2016, G’s delinquent amount is KRW 1,071,161,470, including additional tax, etc., KRW 219,681,640 (hereinafter “instant tax claim”).

C. The Defendants of G are children of G. The Defendants.

on August 4, 2013, “B” donated KRW 100,000,00 each to Defendant A, B, and E, and KRW 110,00,000 each to Defendant C and D, and KRW 154,796,950 to Defendant F (hereinafter “each gift contract of this case”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through 12 evidence (including each number, hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul 1 and 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. At the time of each of the instant gift contracts asserted by the Plaintiff, G was in excess of its obligation, and as the instant gift contracts deepen in excess of its obligation due to each of the instant gift contracts, each of the instant gift contracts constitutes fraudulent act.

Therefore, each gift contract of this case shall be revoked, and the defendants shall be obligated to pay the amount donated from G to the plaintiff and the damages for delay thereof to its original state.

B. The Defendants’ assertion ① Inasmuch as the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit with the lapse of one year from the date when G knew of his fraudulent act, the instant lawsuit was inappropriate for the exclusion period, and ② G sold the instant parcelling-out right.