1. The contract of donation on February 14, 2020 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet between Nonparty B and the Defendant shall be revoked.

2...

The ground for the claim of this case is as shown in the attached Form Nos. 1 through 5, and it can be recognized by integrating the whole purport of the pleading in the evidence No. 5.

If so, the gift contract concluded on February 14, 2020 with respect to each real estate listed in the separate sheet between B and the defendant constitutes an act of harming the plaintiff, who is the creditor.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim seeking cancellation of the above donation contract and restoration to its original state on February 14, 2020 on the above real estate due to the donation is justified.

As to this, the defendant is a bona fide beneficiary who did not know that the above donation of Eul constitutes an act of harming himself, and therefore, the above donation cannot be revoked. However, the evidence of subparagraphs B through 4 alone is insufficient to recognize that the defendant acted in good faith with respect to the above act of harming Eul, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise, the above assertion is rejected.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified and accepted.