beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
Plaintiff’s assertion
The Plaintiff’s assertion stated in his preparation document, as of November 30, 2020, which was submitted after the closure of the pleadings in the instant case, is not separately considered (the foregoing assertion does not coincide with the purport of the instant claim). The Plaintiff is a monetary obligee of D. D. The Plaintiff entered into an agreement with D on the division of inherited property with respect to 2/17 shares (hereinafter “instant shares”) out of the real estate stated in the purport of the claim on March 23, 2019, and caused the Plaintiff et al. to commit an act detrimental to the creditors, including the Plaintiff, by concluding an agreement on the division of inherited property with respect to 2/17 shares among the real estate stated in the purport of the claim on March 23, 2019, and filed a lawsuit seeking the cancellation of the said division agreement against C.
However, after that, C had completed the registration of transfer of ownership (hereinafter “registration of this case”) on May 15, 2020 on the ground of the gift made on May 8, 2020 by the person C (hereinafter “the gift of this case”) to the Defendant, who is an infant of C, as the child of C, for the reason of the gift made on May 8, 2020 (hereinafter “the gift of this case”). Since C’s gift of this case was an intentional act against the Plaintiff and was presumed to be the Defendant’s bad faith, the gift of this case must be revoked by an intentional act, and the Defendant is obliged to implement the procedure of cancellation of the registration of this case to C.
Judgment
In conclusion, the existence of the preserved claim is one of the requisite facts in the cancellation of the act of deception and it is required to be a monetary claim or a type of claim.
Therefore, the Plaintiff asserted that “the gift of this case between C and the Defendant” constitutes an intentional act detrimental to the Plaintiff. However, there is no assertion or proof as to the Plaintiff’s possession of monetary claims or claims for preservation against C. However, the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit without any need to examine the remainder of the issue.
[On the other hand, there may be room to view that the Plaintiff filed the instant lawsuit with respect to D as the preserved claim. However, the act of the Plaintiff, which is subject to the revocation, is the debtor.