사해행위취소
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.
1. The reasoning of this court’s judgment citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows: (a) adding A No. 14 to ten (10) pages of the judgment of the court of first instance; and (b) citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the dismissal as specified below; and (c) citing this by the main sentence
[Supplementary parts] 8th to 16th parallels 8th parallels as follows.
【A) The Defendant was authorized to establish the instant housing construction project on January 25, 2008, but, after having entered into a sales contract with E with respect to the instant real estate, it was unable to acquire the land within the project site properly, such as where the Plaintiff was unable to complete the registration of ownership transfer after having entered into the sales contract with E, and subsequently directly carried out the instant housing construction project.
On September 15, 2010, the Defendant concluded a sales contract for the instant real estate with E by setting the sales price of KRW 1,003,484,00, and concluded a new contract with E as of September 17, 201, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day, and completed the registration of ownership transfer for the reason of trust to K non-real estate trust corporation. However, each of the above registrations of ownership transfer was cancelled due to a provisional disposition, which was laid down after a sales contract with E was concluded with E, and the transfer of ownership was completed on December 2, 2010 according to a sales contract between ASEAN and C.
After securing more than 95% of the land in the project area, the defendant obtained the approval of the project plan on January 3, 2012, and has caused various difficulties such as a rapid increase in interest on the loan due to the delay in the project as above.
The following circumstances can be revealed according to the above facts: (a) the Defendant entered into an implementation agency contract with ASEAN, and obtained authorization for the establishment on January 25, 2008, but the ASEAN did not transfer the ownership of the instant real estate purchased from ASEAN; and (b) the Plaintiff acquired the land in the project site.