Seoul High Court 201Na101089 ( October 31, 2012)

(Incompetence of hearing) It is reasonable to deem that the obligor knew that the assignment of claims harms the obligees.

(Summary of the Judgment of the court below) The act of transferring his claim for return of unjust enrichment to the defendant under excess of his obligation constitutes a fraudulent act, and it is reasonable to deem that the debtor knew that the act of transferring the claim would prejudice the creditors such as the plaintiff, etc. in light of the debtor's property status at the time of transferring

2012Da11731 Revocation, etc. of Fraudulent Act

Korea

The AA

Seoul High Court Decision 2011Na101089 Decided October 31, 2012

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

All of the records of this case, the judgment of the court below, and the grounds of appeal by appellant are examined, and it is clear that their grounds of appeal fall under Article 4 of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Procedure for Appeal, and the appeal is dismissed under Article 5 of the same Act. It is so decided as per Disposition by

Reference materials.

If the grounds for final appeal are not included in the grounds of appeal that make it appropriate for the court of final appeal to become a legal trial, such as matters concerning significant violation of Acts and subordinate statutes, etc., the system of final appeal will not continue to proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final appeal, but will not proceed with the deliberation on the merits of the grounds for final