사해행위에 해당하는지 여부[국패]
Seoul Central District Court-2012-Ban-50228 ( October 03, 2013)
Whether it constitutes a fraudulent act
(As in the judgment of the first instance court) It is not in excess of the obligation at the time of the donation contract, but can not be deemed as insolvent by the donation contract.
2013Na22910 Revocation of Fraudulent Act
Korea
○○○ 2
Seoul Central District Court Decision 2012Gadan502128 Decided 2013.04.03
2013.09.05
2013.09.26
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is all dismissed.
2. Costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked. The each gift contract concluded on September 14, 2010 between the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, and between the Defendant ○○○○, HeadA and KimB, shall be revoked. The Defendant ○○○, HeadA, and HeadA shall implement the procedure for the cancellation of each transfer registration completed on September 15, 2010 by the ○○ District Court Registry No. 46178. As to each portion of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2, with respect to 1/22 shares among the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2, the Defendant ○○○, HeadA, and HeadA shall revoke each gift contract concluded on September 14, 2010 between the Plaintiff and the Defendant ○○○○, HeadA, and HeadA shall be revoked, and the Plaintiff shall have completed the procedure for the cancellation registration of each ownership transfer registration completed on September 15, 2010 as to each of the real estate acquired on September 315, 2016, 20101.
1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;
The court's reasoning concerning this case is as follows: "462,018,860 won of 5th 20th 5th 20th 20th 5th 20th 5th 5th 5th 5th 200 462,018,860 as of July 30, 2010 462,785,220 as of September 14, 2010 462,785,220th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 6th 1st 1st 7th 1st 7th 1st 200 c). Thus, this part is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420
2. Parts to be dried;
(C) Sub-determination
1) 위 인정사실에 의하면, 이 사건 ①증여계약(2010. 7. 30.) 당시 김BB의 적극재산은 별지 목록 제3항 기재 부동산을 제외하더라도 합계 630，200，880원^이고，이 사건채무를 포함한 소극재산은 합계 417,115,261원이므로, 이 사건 증여계약 당시 김BB은 채무초과 상태에 있지 아니하였고, 이 사건 ①증여계약으로 인해 김BB이 무자력이 되었다고 볼 수도 없다.
2) In addition, according to the above facts, the following facts are revealed: ② at the time of the instant donation contract (as of September 14, 2010), KimB’s active property is the aggregate of KRW 602,313,390, and the negative property including the instant debt is the aggregate of KRW 417,115,261, and ② at the time of the instant donation contract, KimB was not in excess of the obligation; ② at the time of the instant donation contract, ② at the time of the instant donation contract, the instant case was not in excess of the obligation, and ② at the instant case ②, the instant case was < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 13710,710,170 (= KRW 33,942,530 + KRW 100,767,640), even if KimB decreased due to the donation contract, the instant case’s positive property still exceeds the positive property.
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendants shall be dismissed in its entirety due to the lack of any ground, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just in its conclusion, and the plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in its entirety as it has no ground, and it is so decided as per Disposition