(영문) 창원지방법원밀양지원 2020.02.12 2019가단12314

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 창원지방법원밀양지원 2020.02.12 2019가단12314

사해행위취소

Text

1. The claim assignment contract concluded on February 8, 2017 between the Defendant and C is KRW 20,00,000.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. D had a claim of KRW 300 million against E, but on August 1, 2012, transferred the said claim to the Plaintiff.

B. E transferred to C September 8, 2010 the name of the owner of the building on the land of the F and two parcels (hereinafter “instant building”).

C. The Plaintiff filed a lawsuit seeking revocation of fraudulent act (hereinafter “instant related lawsuit”) against C by asserting that “In order to preserve the said claim as a transferee of D’s claim against D against D, the Plaintiff, who was subject to transfer of D’s claim, revoked the change of the name of the building owner on September 8, 2010 between E and C, a fraudulent act, in order to preserve the said claim.”

On August 26, 2013, in the instant lawsuit related thereto, “C shall pay KRW 100 million to the Plaintiff immediately after receiving the compensation for expropriation of the instant building” (hereinafter “instant mediation”) was established.

(In accordance with the above conciliation clause, a claim of KRW 100 million attached to the subsidiary (hereinafter referred to as "claim of this case"). D.

The instant building, etc. was incorporated into a river project zone implemented by the Republic of Korea, and the Central Land Tribunal decided to expropriate the instant building as KRW 1,725,471,00 on April 23, 2015.

However, there is a dispute over the ownership of the instant building between E, C, etc., and on June 11, 2015, the Republic of Korea deposited the said compensation (hereinafter “the instant deposit”) with seven persons, including C, as the principal deposit on the ground that the owner of the instant building cannot be identified.

E. G filed a lawsuit against C and the Republic of Korea seeking confirmation that part of the claim for the payment of the instant deposit is E, premised on the premise that the subject of the claim for the payment of the instant deposit is attributed to E, with the Busan District Court Decision 2015Da227518 (hereinafter “the lawsuit on the instant deposit”).

The court of first instance.

유사 판례

-창원지방법원밀양지원 2020.02.12 2019가단12314

-창원지방법원 밀양지원 2018.10.17 2018가단11208

-서울행정법원 2016.07.07 2015구합79833

-수원지방법원 2017.01.24 2014구합4598

-수원지방법원 2015.12.17 2014구합58441