beta
(영문) 대구지방법원경주지원 2020.08.18 2019가단1926

사해행위취소

Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. Of the costs of lawsuit, the part arising between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is the Plaintiff.

Reasons

According to Articles 584, 347 (1) and 406 of the Debtor Rehabilitation and Bankruptcy Act, after a decision to commence individual rehabilitation procedures has been rendered ex officio, the debtor shall exercise the right to set aside, and the court may order the debtor to exercise the right to set aside, at the request of the creditor or rehabilitation commissioner or ex officio, after the decision to commence individual rehabilitation procedures has been rendered. When a lawsuit filed by any individual rehabilitation creditor is pending at the time the decision to commence individual rehabilitation procedures are commenced, the lawsuit procedures shall

In light of the purport of these regulations and the nature of individual rehabilitation procedures, which are collective debt settlement procedures, and the purpose of avoidance power, after the decision to commence individual rehabilitation procedures has been rendered, the debtor shall exercise the avoidance power aiming at equal repayment to all creditors, and the debtor shall not file a creditor suit aiming at preserving individual claims on the premise that individual rehabilitation creditors who are unable to receive repayment or require repayment of individual rehabilitation claims stated in the list of individual rehabilitation creditors are subject to individual compulsory execution.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2010Da37141, Sept. 9, 2010). Therefore, when a creditor’s revocation lawsuit is pending at the time of commencement of the individual rehabilitation procedure, the debtor who is legally qualified to take over the lawsuit shall take over the lawsuit, and the debtor who takes over the lawsuit shall change the existing creditor’s revocation lawsuit into the lawsuit for avoidance.

On January 16, 2020, after the suit for revocation was instituted by the creditor of this case, the Daegu District Court 2019Da20927 decided January 16, 2020, and the litigation procedure of this case was taken over to the plaintiff. However, the fact that the plaintiff did not change the lawsuit of this case to the lawsuit for denial by the date of closing the argument of this case is apparent in the record, or that it was not changed to the lawsuit for denial by the date of closing the argument of this case, and the purport of the whole statement of Eul