beta
Text
1. As to real estate listed in the separate sheet:
A. A donation contract concluded on July 20, 2015 between the Defendant and B.
Reasons
1. The plaintiff's claims against B are as follows:
[There is no counter-proof by the Defendant] CBB, in addition, the grounds for the registration of the instant real estate are the donations made on July 20, 2015, and there is no dispute over the fact that the Busan East East is the only real estate in B.
3. The act of a debtor’s gratuitous donation of real estate to another person becomes a fraudulent act against the creditor, barring any special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decisions 2003Da60891, Oct. 14, 2005; 2007Da74843, Feb. 14, 2008). In the event that such donation constitutes a fraudulent act objectively, the beneficiary’s malicious act is presumed to have been the beneficiary’s malicious act. Thus, unless the beneficiary proves that he/she was bona fide at the time of the donation, the creditor may cancel the donation and claim restitution of the original status accordingly.
(4) Although the Defendant asserts that he had the following property (claim) at the time of B’s fraudulent act, it is difficult to deny the fraudulent nature of the instant real estate solely on such circumstance.
A claim against the Daeung Machinery Technology Co., Ltd.: Even based on the defendant's assertion itself, this claim is only a claim arising after August 13, 2015, which was subsequent to the fraudulent act in this case, and even in light of the details of the admission and withdrawal, it is not possible to serve as a joint security for the claim, as it has no substantial property value.
Even if claims of deposit claims, retirement pension claims, insurance claims, etc. are assumed as property having a real value, such as the defendant's assertion, the sum of these claims is merely 38,562,935 won for deposit claims (=6,376,935 won for deposit claims + KRW 14,586,000 for retirement pension + KRW 17.6 million for insurance bonds) and thus it is difficult for the plaintiff to secure their claims.
After all, this case is the only real estate B.