beta
부산지방법원 2016.10.11 2015가단55881

사해행위취소등

Text

1. The sales contract concluded on March 23, 2015 with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet between the Defendants is within the scope of KRW 30,00,000.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 19, 2014, the Plaintiff: (a) lent KRW 30,000,000 to Defendant C for a monthly interest rate of KRW 3%; and (b) on October 18, 2014, the due date for repayment was determined and lent.

B. On March 23, 2015, Defendant C sold to Defendant B the real estate indicated in the separate sheet, which was its sole property, in excess of his/her obligation, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on March 24, 2015.

C. On March 24, 2015, the registration of the establishment of a neighboring mortgage Nos. 7, 9, and 10 was cancelled, and on July 10, 2015, the registration of the lease of a house was completed on the leasehold registration order requested by D as to the real estate recorded on the separate date.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts that there is no dispute between the parties, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The debtor's intent to sell real estate, which is the only property, and change it into money easily for consumption, is a fraudulent act, barring special circumstances. The debtor's intent to commit a fraudulent act refers to recognizing that there is a shortage of joint security in claims, which is a subjective element of a fraudulent act, and it does not require any intent or intent to impair creditors. If the debtor sells real estate, which is the only property, and alters into money easily for consumption, it is presumed that the debtor's intent is presumed, and the burden of proving that the purchaser or the transferee did not have bad faith is the beneficiary.

(1) In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, a beneficiary’s good faith is an act of disposal, and thus, constitutes a crime of breach of trust and good faith, and thus, constitutes a crime of breach of trust and good faith. In light of the legal principles as seen earlier, a beneficiary’s act of disposal is deemed to constitute a crime of breach of trust and good faith, and thus, constitutes a crime of breach of trust and good faith, and thus, constitutes a crime of breach of trust and good faith (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 200Da41875, Apr. 9, 200).