beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Purport of claim and appeal
The first instance court.
Reasons
1. The reasons why the court should explain in this judgment are as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the dismissal of a part of the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this shall be cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
2. Parts to be dried;
(a) Parts 4, 16 and 20 of the decision of the court of first instance shall be written in the following manner:
(A) On the other hand, in a case where the creditor seeking revocation of a fraudulent act claims that the debtor's act of providing money to the beneficiary is a gift, if the beneficiary denies it, it should be proved that the said act of offering money constitutes a gift in order to be recognized as a fraudulent act. The burden of proof is on the part of asserting a fraudulent act. In this case, in order to constitute the act of offering money as a gift, it should be interpreted that there exists a mutual agreement between the debtor and the beneficiary as to whether the money provided as such is ultimately reverted to the beneficiary and that it is granted free of charge.
(B) According to the facts and evidence admitted by the Plaintiff on July 26, 2012 (see Supreme Court Decision 2012Da30861, Jul. 26, 2012) based on the aforementioned legal doctrine, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff up to the trial room and the circumstances surrounding the assertion thereof are not acknowledged that the Plaintiff had agreed to grant the Defendant A free of charge the pecuniary benefit equivalent to the amount of the said money through the offering of the said KRW 500 million to the Defendant of the Fla Capital Capital and the Defendant A, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise. Rather, according to the above evidence, the Defendant A prepared a loan transaction agreement (No. 3) with the Fla Capital.