logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2017.11.21 2017가단104930
사해행위취소
Text

1. With respect to real estate listed in the annex:

A. The contract to establish a mortgage concluded on September 7, 2016 between the Defendant and B.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On January 14, 201, the Plaintiff obtained a loan of KRW 30,000,000 from a pair of loans from a single bank (hereinafter “the instant credit guarantee agreement”). Accordingly, the Plaintiff concluded a credit guarantee agreement with the content that guarantees the repayment obligation of KRW 25,50,000, out of the principal and interest repayment obligation to be borne by the said bank (hereinafter “the instant credit guarantee agreement”).

B. B, after causing a credit guarantee accident to a natural body on October 13, 2016, the Plaintiff was unable to pay the principal and interest of the loan, and the Plaintiff subrogated to Han Bank for KRW 23,389,557 in total as of February 15, 2017 in accordance with the credit guarantee agreement in this case.

C. On September 7, 2016, B entered into a mortgage agreement with the Defendant regarding the attached real estate (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the maximum debt amount of KRW 35,00,000,00, and the debtor B and the mortgagee as the defendant (hereinafter “mortgage agreement”). Accordingly, B concluded a mortgage agreement with the Defendant on September 8, 2016 (hereinafter “mortgage creation agreement”). Accordingly, B concluded a mortgage establishment registration near the instant real estate (hereinafter “mortgage creation registration”).

B’s active property is indicated as follows at the time of conclusion of the instant mortgage contract.

CDE also includes the small property B at the time of entering into the mortgage contract of this case as shown below.

A [Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 13, purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

A. In principle, it is required that a claim that can be protected by the obligee’s right of revocation has arisen prior to the occurrence of an act that can be viewed as a fraudulent act. However, at the time of the fraudulent act, there has already been legal relations that serve as the basis of the establishment of the claim, and there is high probability that the claim should be established in the near future by such legal relations, and in the near future, where a claim has been created by realizing the probability thereof in the near future, the claim is also the preserved claim

arrow