1. It was concluded on March 21, 2016 with respect to one-sixth share of a building listed in the separate sheet between the defendant and B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 22, 2005, Korea Exchange Bank loaned 4 million won to B on July 22, 2005, and on November 27, 2008, transferred its credit to the Social Co., Ltd.

On August 4, 2009, Seoul Central District Court (2009j7882) received payment orders against B on the basis of its claims.

According to this, B should pay the amount of 5,859,183 won and 3,800,000 won, which is calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from August 11, 2009 to the date of full payment.

B. On November 1, 2010, the social community of the Eastyang transferred the above credit to the Plaintiff, and notified the transfer of credit to B on November 9, 2010.

As of March 23, 2017, the amount of the Plaintiff’s claim is KRW 11,651,841 (= Principal KRW 3,800,000 and damages for delay).

C. C A deceased on September 30, 2015 and succeeded jointly with Defendant D, E, F, B, and G, a child.

On March 21, 2016, the co-inheritors agreed on the division of inherited property with the building indicated in the attached list, which is inherited property, as the defendant's sole ownership. On March 22, 2016, they completed the registration of transfer of ownership as stated in Paragraph 2 of this Article.

At the time of the agreement on the division of inherited property, B did not have any assets and was in excess of the debt.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap 1 to 5 evidence, purport of the whole pleadings

2. The act of holding a consultation on the division of inherited property that renounces one sixth of the buildings listed in the separate sheet, which are the sole property in excess of debt, constitutes a fraudulent act committed with knowledge that general creditors would cause shortage of joint collateral and thereby prejudice the plaintiff as the creditor.

Accordingly, the defendant who is a beneficiary is presumed to have known that the agreement on the division of inherited property becomes a fraudulent act.

The defendant is merely a fraudulent act, since the building listed in the attached list was entrusted only with the name of the defendant's mother C, and the ownership was found through the agreement on the division of inherited property.