beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2018.01.16 2017가단509244

사해행위취소

Text

1. The gift contract concluded on October 26, 2016 between the Defendant and B on the real estate stated in the separate sheet between the Defendant and B is 69,856.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On September 24, 2013, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit for the claim for reimbursement with the Gwangju District Court 2013Gadan36625 against South Eastern District Court (hereinafter “Seoul Eastdong District Court”) and rendered a judgment on September 24, 2013 that “Seoul Eastdong case and B, etc. jointly and severally with the Plaintiff for KRW 397,050,340 and KRW 92,228,250 among them, and KRW 15% per annum from June 6, 2013 to August 21, 2013, and KRW 19% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment,” and the said judgment became final and conclusive around that time.

B. On October 27, 2016, B completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of donation No. 197258 as to the real estate stated in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) as the only property of the Defendant, who is the Defendant, under excess of the obligation, as of October 27, 2016.

(hereinafter “instant gift contract”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The act of making a donation to the Defendant of the instant real estate, the sole property of which is the property B, which was missing in excess of the obligation for the establishment of a fraudulent act, constitutes a fraudulent act as reducing the creditors’ joint security, including the Plaintiff, and the Defendant’s bad faith, which is the intention to commit suicide and beneficiary

B. Determination 1 on the Defendant’s bona fide defenses. 1) The Defendant asserted that, at the time when the Plaintiff’s preserved claim becomes final and conclusive, the instant real estate had already been secured by considerable debts, and that, due to the Defendant’s full repayment of the said debt, B did not transfer the ownership of the instant real estate to the Defendant on the ground of donation, but did not know that the Defendant would prejudice the Plaintiff’s claim at the time of donation of the instant real estate. 2) According to the written evidence Nos. 1, 1, and 16, as to the instant real estate owned by the deceased C on October 27, 2016, as to the instant real estate, and B, December 11, 2010.