1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On January 15, 2015, Nonparty B completed the registration of ownership transfer on the grounds of sale on January 9, 2015 (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) with respect to each of the instant real estate to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 3, purport of whole pleadings

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion B, on July 18, 201, concluded a credit card use contract with the Plaintiff and subsequently went through a transaction, lost the benefit of the period due to the Plaintiff’s failure to pay the price from June 1, 2014. As of September 23, 2015, Nonparty B bears the obligation of aggregate of the principal, fees, late fees, etc. as of September 23, 2015.

On January 9, 2015, Nonparty B completed the registration of ownership transfer on January 15, 2015 with respect to each of the instant real property, the sole property of which was the Defendant, for sale and purchase on January 9, 2015. However, in light of the circumstances where B entered into the instant sales contract after the decision to dismiss an application for individual rehabilitation on December 3, 2014, the said sales contract constitutes a fraudulent act, and the Defendant’s bad faith is presumed.

The contract of this case between the defendant and the non-party B is revoked within the limit of KRW 6,005,533, which is the amount of claim against the non-party B, and the defendant is obligated to pay the above KRW 6,005,533 to the plaintiff for restitution.

B. In light of the judgment, in order to become a fraudulent act, the debtor's act of disposing of the debtor's property should be caused by the decrease of the debtor's whole property and the shortage of joint security for claims due to such act, i.e., the debtor's small property should be more than active property, and the issue of the debtor's insolvency should be determined as at the time of the

(See Supreme Court Decision 2000Da69026 Decided April 27, 2001, etc.). However, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff alone was that the non-party B’s small property exceeds the positive property at the time of the instant sales contract.

each real estate of this case is the only one in B.