The part of the judgment of the first instance against the defendant shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim against the defendant is dismissed.

Basic Facts

The court's explanation on this part is the same as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it is accepted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion and determination is that the instant sales contract constitutes a fraudulent act detrimental to the Plaintiff, a creditor, and thus, should be revoked. The registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the Defendant with respect to the instant lending should be revoked due to its restitution.

It constitutes a fraudulent act with knowledge that the debtor in excess of his/her liability for a fraudulent act sells real estate to a third party, which is the only property and completed the registration of ownership transfer, constitutes a fraudulent act with knowledge that it would prejudice the creditor unless there are special circumstances

(See Supreme Court Decision 2002Da62036 Decided March 25, 2003, etc.). At the time of the instant sales contract, the loan of this case is the only active property of C, and C was a debt excess, there is no dispute between the parties.

C Since C sold the instant loan to the Defendant and completed the registration of transfer of ownership in excess of the debt, the instant sales contract constitutes a fraudulent act, and is also recognized as the intention of the Plaintiff et al. to understand the creditor, such as the Plaintiff.

The gist of the Defendant’s assertion of the Defendant’s good faith defense was only the Defendant purchased the instant loan with the introduction of N, a workplace partner at the time of the instant sales contract, and C was in excess of its obligation.

(2) The Plaintiff et al. was aware of the fact that the sales contract of this case was detrimental to the obligee, including the Plaintiff.

Facts of recognition

The Defendant purchased the instant loan from P, a member of a golf course, such as N, by introducing N, which is a high school building and a shop building, from P.C.

On June 11, 2018, C’s father, who resided in the instant loan, died on June 11, 2018, C asked C to sell and purchase the instant loan, and P was introduced by P on June 14, 2018 to the Defendant, who is a workplace club, to purchase the instant loan.

Accordingly, the defendant set up the loan of this case with N on June 20, 2018.