beta
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2017.10.13 2017가단6947

사해행위취소 등

Text

1. A reservation to sell and purchase real estate signed on November 3, 2016 between the Defendant and C regarding each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On April 28, 2014, the Plaintiff of the preserved claim filed a lawsuit against C and the Defendant’s husband D, the Defendant’s husband, as Seoul Central District Court 2014Kadan89896, and on December 16, 2014, C and D jointly and severally rendered a favorable judgment to the Plaintiff to pay KRW 75,00,000,000, and damages for delay.

B. The Defendant entered into a trade reservation on November 3, 2016 with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”) with C (hereinafter “instant promise”) and completed the registration of the right to claim transfer of ownership under Article 81117 of the receipt of the Suwon District Court Sung-nam Branch of Sungwon District Court for the same day.

C. Each of the instant real estate is the sole property of C, and C was in excess of its obligation at the time of entering into the instant promise to sell and purchase the instant real estate.

[Ground of recognition] 1 to 4 evidence, fact-finding results of this court's inquiry about Gwangju market, purport of the whole pleadings

2. It constitutes a fraudulent act with knowledge of the fact that an obligor in excess of the obligation to make a sale of the sole property to a third party constitutes a fraudulent act, barring any special circumstance, barring any special circumstance. According to the above recognition, the instant reservation constitutes a fraudulent act, and the Defendant’s bad faith is presumed to constitute a beneficiary.

Therefore, the contract for sale of this case is revoked, and the defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for cancellation of the registration of the right to claim ownership transfer, which is completed with respect to each real estate of this case.

3. The judgment of the Defendant’s assertion is that C was completely independent of the Defendant’s economic aspect, such as having the Defendant live in China until early 2017, while C was married with the Defendant, and C paid the principal and interest of the money borrowed on behalf of the Defendant as part of the purchase price pursuant to the instant purchase and sale promise, and the remainder is agreed to recover and pay the money lent to another person.