1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

1. The Plaintiff, the cause of the instant claim, from February 201 to February 2014, lent a total of KRW 150 million to C’s wife F.

C is jointly and severally liable to pay F's debt to the Plaintiff due to the daily home care agency responsibility.

C The issuance of a promissory note stated in the purport of the claim is a fraudulent act detrimental to C’s general creditors.

The Plaintiff’s above claim against C is a preserved bond, seeking the revocation of the issuance of the said promissory note, and seek the notification of the assignment and transfer as stated in paragraph (2) of the purport of the claim.

2. The creditor's revocation lawsuit concerning the legitimacy of the lawsuit in this case shall be instituted within five years from the date of the relevant juristic act;

(Article 406(2) of the Civil Act. According to the Plaintiff’s assertion and the purport of the instant claim, each of the above promissory notes was issued on May 25, 2008.

However, it is evident that the instant lawsuit filed on September 7, 2016, which claimed that the act of issuing the said promissory note constitutes a fraudulent act and sought the revocation thereof, was filed on September 7, 2016.

Unlike this, there is no evidence to prove that the issuance of the said Promissory Notes was conducted within five years retroactively from the date of the filing of the instant lawsuit.

Thus, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful.

(Decree) Even if the lawsuit of this case is lawful, in light of the evidence Nos. 1 and 2-1 and 3-2, the statement of evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 10 through 14, 16, and 17 is insufficient to recognize the existence of the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant C, which is the preserved claim for the revocation of the obligee of this case, and thus, the Plaintiff’s claim of this case is dismissed.