사해행위취소
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, 2/15 shares of each real estate listed in the separate sheet 2 to 4 between the plaintiff and the defendant.
1. The plaintiff is the exercise of the right of revocation in the first instance court. The plaintiff sought the cancellation of a lease agreement and its restoration to its original state to co-defendant A, which was entered into with respect to real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the attached Table No. 1, and the defendant's partial cancellation of a contract of donation and its restoration to its original state, which was entered into with respect to share No. 2/15 of the real estate listed in the attached Table No. 2 through paragraph (4) of the attached Table No. 4, and sought compensation for equivalent value, and the cancellation of a contract of donation and its restoration
The court of first instance accepted all the claims against the defendant and dismissed the above claims against the defendant A.
The defendant filed an appeal against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance against the part that ordered the plaintiff to compensate for the value of 2/15 shares of each real estate listed in the attached list 2 through 4.
However, Article 415 of the Civil Procedure Act that a change in the judgment of the first instance court may be made within the scope of filing an objection is not applicable to the matters to be investigated by the court ex officio, regardless of the party’s request (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 95Da14817, Jul. 25, 1995). Whether there is a benefit in the protection of rights in the revocation of fraudulent act and the claim for compensation for value among each real estate listed in paragraphs 2 through 4 of the attached list constitutes the matter to be
Therefore, the scope of the judgment of this court is the part concerning the cancellation of fraudulent act and claim for compensation for value of 2/15 shares among the real estate listed in the separate list Nos. 2 through 4 against the defendant of the plaintiff.
2. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement against C 1) The Plaintiff is deemed D Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “D”) around August 8, 2012, around August 8, 2012.
2) As between the insured Co., Ltd. and the Insured Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Macochix”)
D. From August 8, 2012 to November 11, 2013, the insurance amount of KRW 330,000,000,000 and the insurance period shall be from August 8, 2012.