beta
Text
1. Defendant B’s KRW 108,000,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual rate of KRW 5% from December 20, 2010 to December 28, 2015.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 10, 2010, with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) between the Plaintiff and the Defendant, a sales contract with the purchase price of KRW 120 million, KRW 12,000,000, KRW 12,000, and KRW 16,000,000 on the remainder payment date (hereinafter “instant sales contract”).
B. On December 20, 2010, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer for the instant real estate to the Defendant on the grounds of a sales contract dated December 10, 2010.
C. Meanwhile, on May 20, 2015, Defendant B entered into a donation agreement with Defendant C on the instant real estate, the sole property of which is the instant real estate (hereinafter “instant donation agreement”) and completed the registration of ownership transfer under Defendant C’s name on May 21, 2015.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Judgment as to the main claim
A. On December 10, 2010, the Plaintiff asserted that, although Defendant B intended to purchase the instant real estate from the Plaintiff on December 10, 2010 and completed the registration of ownership transfer, Defendant B is obligated to pay the remainder of KRW 12,000,000 to the Plaintiff out of the above purchase price, Defendant B is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the remainder of the above purchase price, and the gift contract between the Defendants, which was concluded with respect to the said real estate, which is the only property of Defendant B, should be revoked as a fraudulent act, and Defendant C is obligated to perform the registration procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration for the said real estate as restitution for cancellation of fraudulent act.
As to this, the Defendants asserted that the Plaintiff’s claim is groundless since Defendant B acquired ownership of the instant real estate from the Plaintiff on the ground of payment in kind.
Therefore, the issues of this case are whether Defendant B decided to what grounds for registration at the time of completing the registration of ownership transfer concerning the instant real estate from the Plaintiff.