사해행위취소
With respect to each real estate listed in the attached list, the mortgage contract concluded on January 4, 2019 between the defendant and B and the defendant.
1. Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the arguments and evidence evidence Nos. 1-5 (including each number), the Plaintiff entered into a mortgage contract with the Changwon District Court on March 15, 2019 and each mortgage contract with the maximum debt amount of KRW 75,00,000,000 for each real estate in which B had been owned between the obligor B and the obligor, as indicated in the separate sheet No. 14,141,144, including the indemnity claim of KRW 13,389,518, and the legal procedure expenses, etc. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25250, Jan. 4, 2019; Presidential Decree No. 25251, Mar. 15, 2019; Presidential Decree No. 25250, Jan. 4, 2019; Presidential Decree No. 252515, Mar. 15, 2019>
2. According to the above facts, the obligor B became insolvent by completing the contract to establish the right to collateral security and the registration thereof in the future of the Defendant with respect to the real estate stated in the separate sheet with which it was the sole asset.
I would like to say.
Therefore, since the defendant, a beneficiary, is presumed to have committed a fraudulent act, barring any other special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to cancel each contract to establish a mortgage of this case and cancel each registration as the restoration to original state
The defendant's defense as a genuine creditor, but it is not enough to keep account account account transfer as to whether there exists an actual claim, and even if it is another creditor, the act of setting up a right to preferential payment with only one creditor with respect to the only property of the debtor itself constitutes a fraudulent act against other general creditors. Therefore, the defendant's defense is without merit.
3. If so, the plaintiff's claim is reasonable, and it is so decided as per Disposition.