logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울서부지방법원 2017.05.11 2016가합31862
사해행위취소
Text

1.(a)

On July 30, 2015 and August 20, 2015, the real estate recorded in the separate sheet between the defendant and the non-party C is respectively concluded.

Reasons

1. The facts under the basis of facts may be found, either in dispute between the parties or in accordance with Gap evidence 1 to 18, Eul evidence 6 (including branch numbers), together with the purport of the whole pleadings. (a)

The Plaintiff is a person who has a claim of KRW 237,60,000 against Nonparty C according to a protocol of compromise established on November 15, 2012 in Seoul Western District Court 2012Gahap30953 in the loan claim case.

B. On July 30, 2015, and August 20, 2015, with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet owned by C (hereinafter “instant building”), the Defendant concluded each contract to establish a mortgage (hereinafter “each of the instant mortgage contracts”) with C, who had been unable to pay debts as of August 30, 2015 and August 20, 2015, and accordingly, received each of the maximum debt amounts of KRW 2,30,000,000 as of July 31, 2015, as stipulated in subparagraph 1(b) of the Disposition No. 7301, as of July 31, 2015, the Chuncheon District Court, as of the receipt on August 31, 2015, as the maximum debt amount of KRW 300,000,000,000, and KRW 8263,270,000,000,000 each of the instant mortgages (hereinafter “the maximum debt amount”).

C. On January 8, 2016, the Defendant filed an application for a voluntary auction of real estate based on each of the above collateral security D with the Youngcheon District Court Youngcheon District Court Youngcheon Branch D, and accordingly, the procedure for the voluntary auction of the instant building was commenced.

2. An act of a debtor in excess of his/her obligation to offer real estate owned by him/her to any one of the creditors as collateral for claims constitutes a fraudulent act in relation to other creditors, except in extenuating circumstances;

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 88Meu23186, Sept. 12, 1989; 97Da10864, Sept. 9, 1997). C, in relation to the instant case, was missing from a state of health class or excess of liability, is the building owned by C.

arrow