사해행위취소
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. Claims as to the cause of claim;
A. C’s pro-friendly D lent KRW 85,300,000 to C on May 28, 2007.
B. On August 23, 2012, the Plaintiff acquired the above claim against D from D.
C. Meanwhile, the wife E died on October 13, 2006.
C With the agreement on the division of inherited property with the heir such as the Defendant, renounced the right to the instant real estate, which is one’s share of inheritance, and completed the registration of ownership transfer to the Defendant on August 17, 201 on the ground of inheritance by agreement and division as of October 13, 2006.
E. It is recognized that C, the sole inherited property of this case, in excess of its obligation, gave up his/her inheritance shares and received cash easily consumed on behalf of the Defendant et al., and agreed on the division of inherited property with respect to other creditors, barring special circumstances, it would constitute fraudulent act in relation to other creditors, and C, thereby reducing the creditor’s joint security, thereby impairing the Plaintiff, who is the creditor.
Therefore, a contract for the division of the above inherited property shall be revoked as a fraudulent act, and the defendant shall be obligated to implement C the procedure for the cancellation of ownership transfer registration for the instant real property due to restitution to its original state.
2. The instant lawsuit was filed within one year after the Plaintiff acquired the status of creditor against C by taking over D’s claim, and the exclusion period was observed in form.
3. In order to exercise the right of revocation on the existence of the preserved claim, it should be premised on the fact that the debtor can exercise the right of revocation.
First of all, according to the records of evidence Nos. 85,300,000 to C around May 28, 2007, it is recognized that the amount equivalent to the above amount has been deposited in the passbook under the name of C around May 28, 2007, but there is no evidence to acknowledge that the above amount is the amount loaned to C, even though it is recognized that it is the amount loaned to C.
D Accordingly, May 28, 2007.