사해행위취소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following additional determination as to the assertion emphasized by the defendant in the court of first instance.
2. The defendant's assertion and judgment
A. The Defendant asserts that, on February 4, 2016, the purchase price was paid in full at the time of the instant racing sales with B and the Plaintiff, and that, on the other hand, it was not possible to know the relationship between B and the Plaintiff’s debt.
B. In a lawsuit seeking the revocation of a fraudulent act, the beneficiary has the burden of proving that the beneficiary was a fraudulent act. In such a case, objective and acceptable evidence should be supported when recognizing that the beneficiary was bona fide at the time of the fraudulent act. The defendant's assertion that the beneficiary was bona fide at the time of the fraudulent act should not be readily concluded (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 2006Da5710, Apr. 14, 2006; 2009Da60466, Jul. 22, 2010). The following circumstances revealed after considering the evidence and arguments submitted by the plaintiff and the defendant, i.e., the defendant concluded a sales contract with B on Feb. 4, 2016 and paid KRW 5,00,000 out of the price to the third party. However, the defendant's assertion that there was no objective evidence to support the payment of the purchase price to B0,000,000 won.