logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원안양지원 2017.12.14 2017가단107269
사해행위취소
Text

1. As to shares of 1/5 of the real estate listed in the Schedule,

A. The Defendant A and Nonparty C concluded on January 2, 2015.

Reasons

1. Basic facts - the Plaintiff has a claim for the amount of KRW 99,341,04 against Nonparty C and the amount of KRW 28,865,274 among them, for delay damages calculated at the rate of 25% per annum from the date of full payment on May 23, 2007 to the date of full payment.

C’s mother-friendly D died on December 31, 2014, and C, Defendants, E, and F, children, jointly inherited D.

On January 2, 2015, D’s co-inheritors, including C, made an agreement on the division of inherited property owned solely by Defendant A (hereinafter “instant agreement on division of inherited property”), on January 2, 2015 (hereinafter “instant real property”). Accordingly, Defendant A’s order 1-B regarding the instant real property.

- complete the registration procedure for transfer of ownership in the port.

After that, Defendant B’s subsequent disposition on February 13, 2015 on the instant real estate was based on a pre-sale agreement made on February 2, 2015.

The registration of the right to claim ownership transfer as stated in paragraph has been completed.

At the time of the agreement on division of the inherited property of this case, the inheritance shares of this case were the only property C.

[Reasons for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap 1 to 3 evidence, and the result of an order to submit taxation information to the court when this court was known, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. The agreement on the division of inherited property as to whether a fraudulent act is established is that the ownership of the inherited property, all or part of which was provisionally owned by co-inheritors upon commencement of inheritance, becomes final and conclusive by performing as a sole ownership of each inheritor or as a new co-ownership relationship, and therefore, it is therefore subject to the exercise of the right to revoke a fraudulent act. Meanwhile, barring any special circumstance, the debtor's act of selling one's own property, and changing it into money easily for consumption or transferring it to another person without compensation, becomes a fraudulent act against the creditor, and thus, it is already in excess of obligations.

arrow