(영문) 광주지방법원 2020.01.10 2019가단511081



1. As to shares of 4/21 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet

A. It was concluded on June 15, 2017 between the Defendant and C.


1. Basic facts

A. On October 18, 2016, the Plaintiff loaned KRW 20 million to C at the interest rate of KRW 8.3% per annum and on October 17, 2018.

B. On June 15, 2017, C entered into a donation contract (hereinafter “instant donation contract”) with the Defendant, one’s mother, and 4/21 shares of real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the said real estate to the Defendant on the same day.

C. At the time of the instant donation contract, C had no particular active property other than the instant real estate, and had been in excess of its obligation due to the Plaintiff, D Co., Ltd.’s debt burden.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 and 5 (including branch numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Since the secured claim C had been established prior to the conclusion of the instant gift agreement with the Defendant, the Plaintiff’s claim for the loan to C may be a preserved claim for the right of revocation of the loan.

B. With respect to the obligee’s right of revocation of fraudulent act and intent of deception, fraudulent act means an act of disposal of property that makes it impossible to fully satisfy the obligee’s claims by reducing the obligor’s property so as to make the obligor’s joint security of claims short or by making the obligor lack of joint security already in the state of shortage, and intention of deception means recognizing the above facts.

According to the above facts, C’s act of transferring the ownership of the instant real estate, which is the only property of the Defendant through the instant donation contract, constitutes a fraudulent act that reduces the debtor’s property and causes deficiency in joint security of claims, and in light of C’s financial status, etc., C is sufficiently aware of the fact that the joint security of claims is insufficient due to the instant donation contract, and therefore C’s act as the debtor is an obligor.