logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.08.21 2014가단5307872
사해행위취소
Text

1. The Defendant and Nonparty B concluded on May 18, 201 with respect to 2/11 shares of each real estate listed in the separate sheet.

Reasons

1. Fact-finding;

A. The Plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement against B was affirmed by the Seoul District Court Decision 2007Gapo2354967, which rendered a favorable judgment against B.

According to the above judgment, B shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 23,304,690 and KRW 16,487,90 among these amounts, 18% per annum from October 23, 1995 to January 2, 1998; 21% per annum from the next day to January 14, 1998; and 27% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

The plaintiff filed another claim for reimbursement against B and received a favorable judgment with the Seoul District Court Decision 2008Gaso1718749.

According to the above judgment, B shall pay to the Plaintiff 12,525,915 won and 6,641,622 won with 25% interest per annum from July 15, 1998 to the day of full payment.

B. The Defendant waivers of inheritance B is the mother of B and B is the head of the four siblings.

B's father C died on May 18, 2014, and there are real estate listed in the attached Table as the inherited property.

On May 18, 2014, the inheritors including B entered into an agreement on the division of inherited property on which each of the above real estate is owned solely by the defendant, and accordingly the defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer.

B There is no particular property that ends on the inherited property at the time of the division consultation of inherited property.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, the head of Seocho-gu, and the result of each fact-finding on the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport]

2. Determination on the cause of the claim

(a) the establishment of a fraudulent act (1) to B, 2/11 of the above real estate's inheritance shares constitutes its entire property;

Nevertheless, it constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the general creditors including the Plaintiff, in which B made a division agreement on inherited property devolving on the Defendant.

The plaintiff may exercise his/her right of revocation in order to preserve his/her claim for judgment against B.

(2) The defendant's assertion (A).

arrow