beta
(영문) 서울고등법원 2017.07.20 2016나2076283

사해행위취소

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is examined as follows, and thus, it is cited in accordance with the main sentence

【The parts to be used for repair】 Two parallels from the second to the second two pages to the “2014,” “ August 26, 2015.”

4 8 pages "A No. 65" shall be added to 8 pages.

7 The plaintiff added "the 38,246,439N to the deceased" and added "the 14th "the claim for indemnity" to "the borrowed money and the claim for indemnity".

8 to 79 parallels shall be carried out as follows:

“A) The Plaintiff lent 38,246,439N to the Deceased. The Plaintiff subrogated for 456,731,924 UN’s loan obligations of the Plaintiff, the Deceased, and F, which were jointly and severally guaranteed by the Plaintiff, and the Deceased, and held a claim for reimbursement of 152,243,974 UN, which is the part of the Deceased’s share. As such, the said loan and claim for reimbursement constitute a preserved claim of the obligee’s right of revocation. However, it is insufficient to acknowledge it solely on the basis of the respective statements stated in the evidence No. 25,66,67, and 68, and there is no other evidence to prove

From the 8 side to the 3rd parallel “instant case,” the last sentence “from the 8th parallel,” to the effect that “There is no main or evidentiary evidence” was sufficient to recognize that there was a high probability of the fact that the said claim for compensation has been established in the near future at the time of the conclusion of the instant property division contract, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it.”

2. Conclusion, the first instance judgment is justifiable.

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.