사해행위취소 등
1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
purport, purport, and.
In the judgment of the court of first instance, the plaintiff primarily requested the defendants to implement the procedure of cancellation registration based on the revocation of fraudulent act, and demanded the defendants to pay money. In addition, the court of first instance requested the defendants to implement the procedure of cancellation registration based on the invalidation of the cause. The court dismissed the defendants among the main claims and accepted the part seeking the implementation of the procedure of cancellation registration and dismissed all of the conjunctive claims.
Therefore, the plaintiff filed an appeal only with respect to the remainder of the claim against the defendant B, excluding the remainder of the claim against the defendant B, and the conjunctive claim. Thus, the plaintiff's appeal is limited to this.
Facts of recognition
This Court's explanation on this part is the same as the statement "1. Recognizing the fact of recognition" in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the use of "Defendant clans" as "foreign clans". Thus, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
The sales contract of this case for the plaintiff's primary claim is a fraudulent act that infringes on the claim against the non-party clan based on the judgment of the plaintiff's prior suit, and thus, it should be revoked, and the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the beneficiary B and the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the subsequent purchaser C should be cancelled
Judgment
According to the facts of recognition of the preserved claim, the plaintiff had a claim against the non-party clan for unjust enrichment based on the judgment of the court below, and the above claim was already created at the time of the sales contract of this case, which is therefore protected by the obligee's right of revocation.
It would result in the reduction of the debtor's property on the whole property, that is, the decrease of the creditor's property by the creditor's act of disposing of the property, so the joint security of the claim is insufficient.