(영문) 전주지방법원 2015.04.23 2014나4838 | 리걸엔진

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) 전주지방법원 2015.04.23 2014나4838

대여금 등

Text

1. Of the judgments of the first instance court, the part against the defendant in the judgment shall be modified as follows:

Defendant and the co-defendant A.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be acknowledged in full view of the following facts: (a) there is no dispute between the parties; (b) evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4 through 6, 9 through 12; and (c) evidence Nos. 6; and (d) the fact inquiry into the chief of the court of first instance with respect to the chief of the court of first instance, and the purport of the whole pleadings as to the chief of the court of first instance.

A entered into a donation contract with the defendant who was the wife at September 26, 2011 on the share of the instant apartment in the name of A (hereinafter “instant donation contract”) and completed the registration of share ownership transfer in the future of the defendant on the same day with respect to the share of the instant apartment in the name of A.

B. At the time of the instant donation contract, A was liable to the Plaintiff for a loan amounting to KRW 56,090,000 in total as shown in the bond details sheet as shown in attached Table 2.

C. On August 11, 2004, the Defendant filed a report of marriage with A, and maintained the marital life between seven and five months, and filed an application for divorce on October 5, 201 on October 18, 201, and completed a report of divorce on February 2, 2012, after obtaining confirmation of a divorce by agreement from the Jeonju District Court.

2. Determination:

A. According to the facts as to the existence of a fraudulent act’s secured claim, A bears the principal and interest obligation of at least 56,090,000 won (total sum of the principal and interest unpaid as of September 26, 201) against the Plaintiff at the time of the conclusion of the instant gift agreement. As such, the Plaintiff’s claim for the principal and interest of loan or the amount of non-material transactions may constitute a preserved right of the fraudulent act.

B. If the debtor, as to whether the fraudulent act was established (1) the sole property or the debtor donated his sole property to another person under excess of his obligation, such act would constitute a fraudulent act unless there are special circumstances, and the fact that A owned the shares of the instant apartment at the time of the donation contract is as seen earlier.

As to this, A shall be subject to this case.

유사 판례

-전주지방법원 2014.04.30 2013가단35551

-수원지방법원 안산지원 2018.11.06 2017가단16167

-인천지방법원부천지원 2015.02.06 2014가합3978

-서울중앙지방법원 2014.09.18 2014가단5128888

-의정부지방법원 2016.05.18 2015가단109478