사해행위취소
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Basic facts
A. C’s debt 1) C issued two promissory notes as indicated below and delivered them to E (hereinafter “instant notes”)
(2) On January 15, 2015, G Company H Gyeongnam Bank 1, 2015, KRW 63.6 million at the place of payment of the face value of the check number payment, KRW 63.6 million, and KRW 12,230,000,000, KRW 16.7 million, and KRW 2,000,000,000,000 from the Plaintiff and issued the said bill to the Plaintiff. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 25748, Sep. 30, 2014; Presidential Decree No. 25779, Dec. 30, 2014; Presidential Decree No. 25906, Jan. 1, 2015; Presidential Decree No. 25757, Mar. 20, 2015>
3) The Plaintiff presented the instant bill to Gyeongnam Bank Co., Ltd., but refused to pay, and currently holds the said bill. 4) The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit claiming the amount of the bill with the Ulsan District Court 2015da10539 (Seoul District Court) and was sentenced on December 22, 2015 that “C shall pay to the Plaintiff 20% per annum from August 5, 2015 to September 30, 2015, the amount calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from the next day to September 30, 2015,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive.
B. A gift 1 between C and the Defendant was married with C on May 1, 1989, and on March 3, 2015, the agreement was married on March 3, 2015. (2) On January 15, 2015, C completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of the gift made on January 14, 2015.
(hereinafter referred to as "the above gift between C and the defendant" is the gift of this case (the basis for recognition). [No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including provisional evidence), Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings.
2. Determination
A. The plaintiff asserts that C’s donation of the apartment of this case to the defendant constitutes a fraudulent act. Accordingly, the defendant asserts that the above donation does not constitute a fraudulent act because it is a substantial division of property following the divorce.
B. Whether a fraudulent act was committed.