(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.12.10 2020가단11222

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 인천지방법원 2020.12.10 2020가단11222

공사대금

Text

Defendant B shall pay 15,00,000 won to the Plaintiff and 12% per annum from April 19, 2020 to the day of complete payment.

Reasons

1. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Plaintiff: (a) around September 2018, Defendant B and C received a contract for electrical construction from Defendant B and C; and (b) around February 2019, for electrical construction for F and two parcels; (c) but did not receive the construction cost; (d) thus, the Plaintiff sought payment of KRW 15 million for the unpaid construction cost from Defendant B and C.

In order to avoid compulsory execution, Defendant B and C completed the registration of ownership transfer in the name of Defendant D with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”), and this constitutes a fraudulent act, and thus, revoked and seek the implementation of the procedure for the registration of ownership transfer.

2. Determination

(a) Claim against Defendant B: Judgment by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act);

B. According to the evidence No. 1 to No. 7 of the claim No. 1 to No. 7 against Defendant C, it is not sufficient to recognize that Defendant B merely contracted for electrical construction to the Plaintiff, and the above evidence alone is insufficient to recognize that Defendant C agreed to pay the above construction cost jointly with Defendant C, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge this otherwise.

Therefore, the claim against the defendant C is without merit.

C. The revocation of the fraudulent act against Defendant D can only be claimed by means of filing a lawsuit with the court, but cannot be asserted by means of an attack and defense in the lawsuit, and the judgment revoking the fraudulent act becomes effective as a judgment of formation, and there is no assertion as to the fact that the judgment of revocation of the fraudulent act against the act of disposal of real estate between Defendant B and D was declared and finalized.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant D is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim against the defendant B is justified, and the claim against the defendant C and D is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제208조 제3항 제3호

유사 판례

-수원지방법원 2019.07.18 2018나7952

-수원지방법원 2020.09.17 2020나62259

-서울중앙지방법원 2016.10.25 2016가단69902

-수원지방법원안산지원 2017.08.09 2017가단3154

-수원지방법원 2018.07.10 2018나51614