logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
Text
Reasons
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.02.07 2016가합539392
사해행위취소
Text

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On February 24, 2012, A Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “A”) entered into a loan agreement with C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “C”) with the loan principal of KRW 10 million,000,000,000, the loan period of KRW 13% per annum, and the agreement with 13% per annum (hereinafter “instant loan agreement”). On the same day, C paid the loan amount of KRW 10,00,000,000.

B. On February 27, 2012, C paid KRW 303,00,000 to the Defendant, who is the husband of C’s director D.

C. After the instant loan agreement, C lost its interest on June 16, 2012 due to delinquency. As of February 19, 2016, the principal and interest of the instant loan owed by C to A is KRW 10,000,000,000, interest of KRW 9,403,221,566, totaling KRW 19,403,221,566.

A was declared bankrupt on April 30, 2013 by Seoul Central District Court 2013Hahap54, and the plaintiff was appointed as bankruptcy trustee.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence of Nos. 3 through 9 (including branch numbers for those with additional numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), Eul evidence of Nos. 1, 2, and 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's primary assertion that C donated KRW 303,00,000 to the defendant in excess of his/her obligation, which constitutes a fraudulent act, must be revoked, and the defendant shall pay KRW 303,00,000 to the plaintiff as the restoration to original state.

Preliminaryly, C’s payment of KRW 303,00,000 to the Defendant constitutes a fraudulent act, which constitutes an act with intent to prejudice other creditors in collusion with the Defendant in excess of the obligation, and thus constitutes a fraudulent act. As such, the Defendant ought to pay the Plaintiff KRW 303,00,000,000 to the original state.

3. Determination

A. At the time of February 27, 2012, the fact that C had paid KRW 303,00,000 to the Defendant, and as of February 27, 2012, A held the principal and interest of the loan under the instant loan agreement with respect to C is as seen earlier, and the said loan and interest claim are the same as the Plaintiff.

arrow