beta
(영문) 수원지방법원 2019.03.27 2018가단522054

사해행위취소

Text

1. It was concluded on December 18, 2014 with respect to the portion of 1/4 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet between Defendant B and D.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Defendants and D et al., married with E on January 5, 1974, and left D, Defendant B, etc. as their children, and divorced from E on May 1, 2012.

B. The real estate listed in the separate sheet 1) was originally owned by E, and was donated to Defendant C on November 10, 2006.2) Defendant C donated 1/4 shares of each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet 1/4 to Defendant C and Defendant B.

3) D’s 1/4 shares donated among the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate shares”)

As to Defendant B, the Suwon District Court’s chief registry office of the Suwon District Court was received on December 19, 2014, No. 40575, Dec. 18, 2014 (hereinafter “instant donation contract”).

(4) Defendant B completed the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of the gift on August 8, 2017, with the head of Suwon District Court No. 20309, received on August 8, 2017, as the head of Suwon District Court No. 20309, the registration of transfer of ownership was completed on the ground of the gift on August 8, 2017.

C. The Plaintiff’s claim against D had a claim for the amount of KRW 22,343,415 against D, on April 3, 2013. However, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against D seeking payment of the price for the said goods, damages for delay, etc. (U.S. District Court 2015da19250) against D and won the lawsuit against D on June 18, 2015, and the said judgment became final and conclusive on August 6, 2015.

D Insolvent D did not have any property other than the instant real estate share at the time of entering into the gift contract of this case.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 (including branch numbers), Eul evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the facts found as above, at the time of the donation contract of this case, the Plaintiff owned KRW 22,343,415 against D as well as damages for delay, and thus, the above claim is a preserved claim for exercising the obligee’s right of revocation.

3.