beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2016.09.07 2015가단147668

사해행위취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

Basic Facts

On April 10, 2012, the Plaintiff filed a payment order with C as Seoul Northern District Court 2012 tea188, and received a payment order with the purport that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 138,366,218 and the amount calculated at the rate of 20% per annum from the next day of the delivery of the original copy of the instant payment order to the day of complete payment.” The said payment order was finalized on May 22, 2012.

On April 1, 2014, the defendant, who is the spouse of C, entered into a lease agreement stipulating that real estate specified in attached Form D (hereinafter in this case's apartment) shall be leased KRW 65 million as lease deposit, and the lease period shall be from May 7, 2014 to KRW 24 months, and is residing in the apartment of this case with C.

【In the absence of dispute over the grounds for recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 8, Eul evidence No. 2, plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings, and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of judgment as to the above, the lease deposit of the apartment of this case was established in E apartment No. 101, 1604 at the time of the Speaker-si owned by C, and thus, C actually donated the defendant the deposit amount of KRW 6

Such gift is a fraudulent act because C disposes of the only property under debt excess.

Therefore, the above donation between C and the defendant should be revoked by fraudulent act, and the defendant should transfer to C the right to return the lease deposit.

The written evidence Nos. 5 and 7 alone is insufficient to recognize that the Plaintiff gave a gift of KRW 65 million to the Defendant on April 1, 2014, that is, the Plaintiff’s fraudulent act alleged by the Plaintiff, i.e., the Defendant, and there is no other evidence to support this. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion premised on this premise is without merit without further review.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.