1. On February 4, 2016, 1/11 shares of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet between the Defendant, Nonparty C, and D are concluded.

1. Basic facts

A. On September 18, 2012, the Plaintiff transferred to the Plaintiff the claim for loans against Non-Party Round F (Death, April 25, 2015) of the E Union.

B. Since then, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against Nonparty C and D claiming the acquisition amount (Seoul Central District Court 2016Da7187959, Seoul Central District Court) on January 24, 2018, and sentenced that “C and D shall pay to the Plaintiff 3,347,723 won each within the scope of the property inherited from the network F and 1,742,583 won each of them calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from August 1, 2006 to the day of full payment,” and the above judgment became final and conclusive at that time.

C. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) was owned by the network G, the father of the networkF, and the network G died on June 17, 2014. The heir is the non-party H, his child, I, the network F, J, and the Defendant, who is the spouse, and is the deceased’s heir C and D.

The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer concerning each of the instant real estate on February 1, 2016 pursuant to the agreement on division of inherited property as of February 4, 2016 (hereinafter “instant agreement on division”).

E. C and D did not have any particular active property except for shares 1/11 corresponding to inheritance shares among each of the instant real estate at the time of the instant agreement for division.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap

4. Descriptions of evidence 7 and 8 (including each number for those with serial numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. As acknowledged prior to the occurrence of the right to revoke a fraudulent act, the act of abandoning the inheritance share of each of the instant real estate, which is the only property of the Plaintiff, through the instant agreement division contract while in excess of the obligation, constitutes a fraudulent act that causes or deepens the shortage of joint security against the general creditors including the Plaintiff, and is presumed to constitute a fraudulent act, and the Defendant’s bad faith, which is the debtor, C, D’s will to commit suicide

Therefore, there are special circumstances.