[2] The case where the creditor can exercise his right to revoke the fraudulent act in excess of the creditor's claim amount

1. As recognized in the reasoning of the judgment below, 32 creditors, including the plaintiffs, were divided and reverted to 32 billion won claims in proportion to each of the claims of 32 creditors, including the plaintiffs, in accordance with the legal principles of statutory appropriation of performance, even if the loan claims against the claimant company (hereinafter "claim company") transferred by Cheong So-song (hereinafter "Cheongsong") for repayment of KRW 5,624,687,468, and were below the existing claims amount as 3.2 billion won, the judgment below is just, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence as otherwise alleged in the ground of appeal.

2. According to the records, at the time of concluding a mortgage contract with the defendant, including the defendant (hereinafter "original defendant"), the claimant company at the time of concluding the mortgage contract with the appellate court's decision in the appellate court's holding that the small property was in a state of insolvency in excess of active property, and the claimant company already in excess of obligation entered into a mortgage contract with the defendant about his exclusive real property and completed the registration thereof. In light of these facts, the claimant company's act of offering collateral constitutes a fraudulent act and thereby, the defendant's malicious act in the appellate court's status is presumed to be presumed to be a fraudulent act. We affirm the judgment of the court below, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence

3. As long as the creditor's claim has been established before the fraudulent act, the transferee may exercise the obligee's right of revocation even if the claim has been transferred, and in this case, even if the claim has satisfied the requirements for setting up against the assignment of claim after the fraudulent act, the transferee cannot be an obstacle to the obligee's right of revocation

According to the records, the plaintiffs' right of revocation is justified in the judgment below to the same purport, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, except as otherwise alleged in the grounds of appeal.

4. The scope of revocation of a fraudulent act may seek revocation even beyond the claim amount of the revocation creditor where it is obvious that other creditors demand a distribution, or where there exist special circumstances, such as where the subject matter is indivisible (see Supreme Court Decision 97Da10864 delivered on September 9, 197).

According to the records, 32 creditors, including the plaintiffs, can recognize the fact that the amount of claims against the claimant company by 32 creditors including the plaintiffs reaches 3.2 billion won. Thus, creditors, other than the plaintiffs, among the above creditors, participate in compulsory execution against the dividend amount of 2.6 billion won in the auction procedure as stated in the judgment of the court below. Therefore, in light of the above legal principles, the judgment of the court below that the plaintiffs can exercise the right of revocation against the whole amount of 2.6 billion won distributed to the defendant by the court below in excess of their claim amount, is justifiable. The court below

5. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Shin Hyun-chul (Presiding Justice)