1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the facts of recognition are the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited pursuant to the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The occurrence of the claim for revocation of fraudulent act;

A. As seen earlier prior to the establishment of the preserved claim, the Plaintiff’s above secured claim against B was established prior to the conclusion of the instant mortgage contract, and thus, constitutes the preserved claim for revocation of fraudulent act.

B. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part is that the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

C. Defendant’s defense 1) The summary of Defendant’s defense was F, while Defendant engaged in the scrap metal wholesale business in the name of F. A around 2014, Defendant agreed to be supplied with scrap metal from B, and continued to be supplied with scrap metal at B’s request. Around the end of 2015, B received a large amount of deposit from another company, and was unilaterally suspended transaction with Defendant. At the time, Defendant at that time, the total amount of deposit paid to B up to 50 million won, which was returned to B, was set up the instant collateral security from B as collateral. Accordingly, the instant collateral security was set up in order to secure unpaid deposit arising from a normal scrap metal transaction between Defendant and B. At that time, Defendant did not know that the establishment of the said collateral was prejudicial to the general creditors of B, and thus, Defendant constitutes a bona fide beneficiary. 2) Since, in order to presume a beneficiary’s bad faith in a lawsuit to revoke a fraudulent act, the beneficiary is liable to prove his/her responsibility as a beneficiary.

In this case, the good faith of the beneficiary is between the debtor and the beneficiary, and the debtor and the beneficiary.