logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2016.10.28 2016가단218502
사해행위취소
Text

1. The instant lawsuit shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The grounds for the plaintiff's claim are as shown in the annexed sheet.

2. We examine ex officio the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

Since the period for exercising the creditor's right of revocation under Article 406 (2) of the Civil Code is the period for filing a lawsuit, the court shall investigate ex officio whether the period is observed, and shall dismiss the creditor's right of revocation filed after the lapse of such period as illegal.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2007Da17741 Decided March 24, 201, and Supreme Court Decision 2001Da73138, 73145 Decided July 26, 2002). With respect to the method of determining “the date on which a legal act was committed” which serves as the basis for the filing period in a lawsuit seeking revocation of a fraudulent act, the date on which a legal act constituting a fraudulent act was actually committed should be determined as the basis for the date on which such fraudulent act was actually committed, but in cases where it is difficult to make such determination, it can be determined whether such fraudulent act was actually committed, focusing on the date on which the grounds for registration appears based on the disposal document, focusing on the date on which the registration appears to

(2) In light of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement of No. 4, the Defendant may acknowledge the fact that the registration of ownership transfer was completed in the Defendant’s future due to inheritance due to a division of inheritance as of Nov. 19, 2012, No. 71745, Apr. 24, 2010, as to the portion of No. 1652/5078, out of No. 507 of No. 1607, Nov. 24, 2010, as to the portion of No. 1652/50, out of No. 507, No. 2007Da28819, 28826, Feb. 25, 2010 (see Supreme Court Decision 2007Da28819, Apr. 24, 2010).

Meanwhile, it is apparent that the instant lawsuit was filed on May 9, 2016 after the lapse of five years from the filing date. Thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful as it was filed after the lapse of the filing period.

2. If so, the instant lawsuit is unlawful and thus dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition.

arrow