logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원고양지원 2015.03.25 2014가단50855
사해행위취소
Text

1. The sales contract concluded on October 25, 2012 between the Defendant and B on the real estate stated in the separate sheet between the Defendant and B is 80,000.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

가. B은 2007. 8. 17. 주식회사 오쉘윈(이하 ‘오쉘윈’이라 한다)과 파주시에 위치한 C 상가(이하 ‘이 사건 상가’라 한다) E동 104호(이후 C동 107호로 교체하였다)를 분양대금 497,550,000원으로 정하여 분양받는 분양계약을 체결하였다.

B. B, among the above sales price on December 17, 2007, as part of the second intermediate payment, obtained a loan of KRW 99,510,000 from the Gyeonggi Solomon Savings Bank, the Plaintiff jointly and severally guaranteed the above loan obligations, and on April 17, 2009, paid a total of KRW 102,143,525 won (= Principal amount of KRW 99,510,000 interest of KRW 2,63,525) by subrogation.

C. Accordingly, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against B seeking reimbursement against the Plaintiff, and the judgment rendered on August 29, 2014, ordering B to pay the said amount of subrogation to the Plaintiff KRW 102,143,525 as well as damages for delay.

(The Seoul High Court Decision 2012Na2996, Seoul High Court 2012Na62136, Supreme Court 2013Da54055, Seoul High Court 2014Na3148, Supreme Court 2014Da36566). D.

On the other hand, on October 25, 2012, B and the Defendant entered into a sales contract with the seller to substitute the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) with the money borrowed from the buyer on July 15, 201, and to sell the remainder of KRW 420 million with the buyer to take over the secured debt of the right to lease deposit and KRW 100 million against the national bank (hereinafter “instant sales contract”). On November 1, 201, B completed the registration of ownership transfer with the Defendant on November 1, 201.

[Ground of recognition] The fact that there has been no dispute, Gap's 1 through 6, 9, Eul's 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings and arguments

2. Determination:

A. As to the establishment of a fraudulent act (1) whether the fraudulent act is constituted, (a) whether it exceeds the obligation.

arrow