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 the judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment is as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following portions, and thus, it shall be quoted for this judgment in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
▣ 제1심판결문 제7쪽 아래에서 6행 '124,000,000원 상당을 각 회수하지 못한 점' 이하를 아래와 같이 고침 『 ⅵ) 동혁건설은 피고에 대한 기존 채무의 일부 변제를 위하여 이 사건 양도계약을 체결한 것으로, 피고로부터 이 사건 양도계약에 따른 금전을 직접 지급받은 것은 아닌 점 등을 종합하며 보면, 원고가 이 법원에 제출한 증거들까지 보태어 살펴보아도 이 사건 양도계약이 체결될 무렵 C 현장에 별지 기재 유체동산이 존재하고 있었다는 점이 입증되었다고 보기 어렵고, 이 사건 양도계약의 체결로 동혁건설의 책임재산이 감소되었다
Therefore, it cannot be readily concluded that the transfer contract of this case is ultimately a fraudulent act detrimental to the general creditor.
(1) The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff claimed rent for construction materials from T&C construction on the premise that construction materials exist under the instant transfer contract at C site in the Cheongju District Court Decision 2013Gahap2990, which was brought by the Defendant against T&C construction. However, according to each of the evidence Nos. 14, No. 18-1, No. 2, and No. 19, and No. 21, the Defendant appears to have claimed rent for construction materials leased to the existing East/L construction in the instant case, contrary to the Plaintiff’s assertion, under the premise that T&C construction acquired the status of the East/L construction, and thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion cannot be accepted). In addition, if the instant transfer contract is deemed as a fraudulent act against the Plaintiff, it exceeds the obligation exceeding the positive property at the time of the said conclusion of the contract.