beta
(영문) 서울북부지방법원 2020.11.24 2020나32518

사해행위취소

Text

1. The part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance is revoked.

2. Attached list between the defendant and the co-defendant B of the first instance trial.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be acknowledged by taking into account the following facts: Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4 (including serial numbers), credit information submission orders issued by the court of first instance to the E agencies of the court of first instance, and the purport of the entire pleadings as a result of fact inquiries by the court of first instance to the Court Administration.

D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) loaned 4 million won (60 months from the date of maturity loan, interest rate, and overdue interest rate, 34.9% per annum) to Co-Defendant B (hereinafter “B”) of the first instance trial on February 4, 2015, and the Plaintiff acquired the above loan claim from D on January 23, 2017 (hereinafter “this case’s loan claim”) and then notified the transfer of claim to B around that time.

B. On July 6, 2015, B entered into a sales contract with the Defendant on an apartment as stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant apartment”), which is the only property owned by the Defendant, with a total of KRW 195 million (hereinafter “instant sales contract”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the same day.

2. Determination

A. 1) As to the defense prior to the merits, the Defendant asserted that the instant apartment, the sole property of which was the instant apartment, had already been sold to the Defendant around January 23, 2017 by the Plaintiff at a credit service company specializing in recovery of the claim, and this constitutes a fraudulent act, even though it had been known that the instant apartment, which was the only property of B, had already been sold to the Defendant around January 23, 2017, and that this constitutes a fraudulent act. (2) At the exercise of the obligee’s right of revocation, “the date when the obligee becomes aware of the ground for revocation,” which is the starting point for the exclusion period, was the date when the obligee became aware of the obligee’s right of revocation, i.e., the date when the obligor becomes aware of the fact

At this time, in order for the creditor to be aware of the cause of cancellation, the debtor simply performed the act of disposal of the property.