사해행위취소
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part concerning real estate stated in the attached table 2 to 9 between the plaintiff and the defendant.
1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows: (a) all the “real estate listed in the attached list” in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be “each real estate listed in the attached list 1”; and (b) all the “bonds listed in the attached list 2” shall be “bonds listed in the attached list 2”; and (c) except where the bonds are used as follows, the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance shall be cited in accordance with the main sentence of
2. On the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, 6 pages 9 to 12 shall be cut down as follows.
When calculating the scope of "Abianian, the amount of the preserved claim by the plaintiff from the date of closing the argument in this court shall be 26,391,271 won [=20,358,067 won (18,686,825 won x 12% x 12% x 12% x / 366 days from February 12, 2016 to November 1, 2016] [18,686,825 x 15% x 15% x (10/365 days from November 2, 2016 to May 30, 2018), while the amount of the preserved claim by the plaintiff from the date of closing the argument in this court shall be less than KRW 26,358,067 to the date of closing the argument in this court.]
[. ... ..... .... 9 . 9 . 6 . to 10 . .. 2 .... as follows.
In a case where a debtor is liable to revoke part of a fraudulent act due to cancellation of a mortgage, etc., the revocation and compensation for the equivalent value shall be limited to ① the amount of joint collateral held by the creditor, ② the amount of creditor’s preserved claim, ③ the amount of joint collateral held by the beneficiary or subsequent purchaser, ③ the amount of the profits acquired by the beneficiary or the subsequent purchaser, whichever is smaller. The joint collateral value of the two or nine real estate in this case is KRW 151,606,81, and the amount of the Plaintiff’s preserved claim is KRW 26,391,271, and the Defendant’s profits acquired (the amount distributed by the Defendant in the auction procedure of Suwon District Court C in Suwon District Court) are as seen earlier. However, if other creditors demand a distribution or if special circumstances exist, such as where it is apparent that the subject matter would be distributed or it is indivisible, the revocation of the fraudulent act may be claimed beyond the amount of claims of the cancelled creditor (see Supreme Court Decision 97Da10864, Sept. 9, 1997).