beta
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2015.09.10 2015가단100273

사해행위취소

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. According to the Seoul Western District Court Decision 2013Gaso578, the Plaintiff has a claim for KRW 10,060,853 and KRW 2,750,00,00 per annum from January 29, 2014 to the date of full payment.

B. Section B owned the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and died on December 17, 2009, and C inherited 2/11 of the property of Section C.

C. On March 29, 2010, the Defendant, who is a South-North Korean student of B, is entitled to the registration of transfer of ownership on the ground of inheritance by an agreement and division as of December 17, 2009 (hereinafter “instant agreement division”) with respect to the instant real estate on March 29, 201.

(A) complete the proceedings. [In the absence of a dispute over the basis for recognition, the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, 6, and 7, and the purport of the whole pleadings.]

2. Determination on the defense prior to the merits

A. Each obligee meeting the requirements for the obligee’s right to revoke the obligor’s right to revoke the obligor’s disposal of his/her own right and can seek restitution. Thus, where multiple creditors filed a lawsuit for revocation of a fraudulent act and restitution at the same time or at different time, these lawsuit does not constitute a duplicate lawsuit, and the same claim of another obligee raised thereafter does not become a benefit in the protection of the obligee’s right, solely on the ground that the judgment became final and conclusive upon winning a favorable judgment on the same claim for revocation of a fraudulent act and restitution with respect to the same fraudulent act.

However, in a case where a creditor has won a favorable judgment on the same fraudulent act by claiming the creditor's cancellation and restitution, and the judgment has become final and conclusive accordingly, the creditor's claim for cancellation and restitution to the original state will not benefit in the protection of rights to the extent that it overlaps. < Amended by Presidential Decree No. 18135, Jul. 11, 2003; Presidential Decree No. 20558, Jul. 11, 2003>