사해행위취소
1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.
Purport of claim and appeal
1...
With respect to this case cited by the judgment of the court of first instance, the following judgments are added as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, in addition to adding the following judgments according to the defendant's assertion, and thus, they are cited as it is by the main sentence of Article 420
In cases where the obligor’s property and business rights are transferred as an organic combination of assets and business rights, and the transfer of business is subject to the exercise of the obligee’s right of revocation (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2013Da84162, Dec. 10, 2015). Although the obligee asserts revocation of the obligor’s bad faith in a lawsuit seeking revocation of such fraudulent act, the obligee bears the burden of proving that the beneficiary or subsequent purchaser is not a creditor, but is in good faith. If the obligor’s property disposal act constitutes a fraudulent act, it shall be based on objective and objective evidence, etc. to acknowledge that the beneficiary or subsequent purchaser was acting in good faith at the time of the fraudulent act or the subsequent purchaser’s purchase price, and the obligor’s transfer of business and the subsequent purchaser should not be readily concluded that the beneficiary or subsequent purchaser was acting in bad faith at the time of the fraudulent act or the subsequent purchaser’s transfer of business (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2000 million won, May 29, 2007).