사해행위취소
1. On May 18, 2016, the real estate indicated in the separate sheet between the Defendant and Nonparty C was concluded between the Defendant and Nonparty C.
1. Facts of recognition;
A. In the Plaintiff’s claim for loans and the claim for fraternity loans against C filed by the Plaintiff against C, “The Plaintiff paid KRW 8,100,000 out of the amount of KRW 53,60,000 lent by it to C from March 13, 2015 to November 23, 2015, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 30,500 out of the total amount of KRW 34,50,000 from March 2014 to January 2016, the judgment rendered on May 10, 2019 to “C shall pay the Plaintiff KRW 38,60,000 and delay damages thereon.”
C fails to file an appeal against the above judgment, the above judgment became final and conclusive on May 29, 2019.
B. C and the Defendant concluded a mortgage contract between C and the Defendant on May 18, 2016 regarding the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) as indicated in C (hereinafter “the instant real estate”), with respect to which the maximum debt amount is KRW 330 million, C and the Defendant concluded a mortgage contract between the debtor and the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant contract”) and the Defendant on May 19, 2016.
(hereinafter referred to as “the establishment registration of a neighboring mortgage of this case”).
On June 8, 2016, the Defendant applied for the voluntary auction of the instant real estate to Seoul Southern District Court D (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”) (hereinafter “instant auction procedure”).
2) At the instant auction procedure, E purchased the instant real estate and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate, the registration of ownership transfer was cancelled.
3) In the instant auction procedure, the amount of dividends against the Defendant was determined as KRW 97,763,113. [The fact that there is no dispute over the grounds for recognition, each entry in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and the purport of the entire pleadings.]
2. According to the facts found in the existence of the preserved claim, a loan equivalent to the Plaintiff’s total amount of KRW 38,600,000 against C and a limited amount of money are the preserved claim seeking revocation of the fraudulent act against the instant mortgage contract.