사해행위취소
The part concerning defendant C in the judgment of the court of first instance (the part concerning revocation of fraudulent act) shall be amended as follows:
1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance citing this case is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the dismissal of part as follows. Thus, it is acceptable to accept this as
The 4th page 12 of the first instance judgment "A" shall be changed to "Plaintiff".
In the first instance judgment, 10 pages 18 to 11 pages 3 are as follows.
“The scope of revocation of a fraudulent act is as seen earlier, the part of each of the instant repayment contracts is already revoked. The remaining parts are as follows. Defendant B 214,592,09 won (300,339,600 won - 85,747,501 won), Defendant C78,837,444 won (110,339,600 won - 31,502,156), Defendant D35,724,909 won (50,000 - 14,275,091 won) (the total amount of the remaining parts without the revocation is 329,154,452 won) and all of the judgment of the first instance judgment should be revoked as follows.
Since the execution of distribution pursuant to the distribution schedule established by the relevant legal principles does not confirm the rights under the substantive law, in case where the creditor who is liable to receive the distribution did not receive the distribution and received the distribution, the creditor who did not receive the distribution has the right to claim the return of unjust enrichment against the person who received the distribution even if he did not receive the distribution, regardless of whether he raised an objection to the distribution, etc., and the creditor who received the distribution in excess of the amount he was liable to return the excess as unjust enrichment to other creditors who did not receive the distribution, even though he did not receive the distribution.
The above legal relationship was paid by the auction court by recognizing the mortgagee as a creditor entitled to receive a dividend.